PMAR vs. QMAR
PMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - PMAR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 15% Buffer Protect March Series Index, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. PMAR is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PMAR returned 9.61%/yr vs 12.38%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
PMAR vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PMAR achieves a 6.36% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.16% return.
PMAR
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 1.94%
- YTD
- 6.36%
- 6M
- 7.38%
- 1Y
- 15.93%
- 3Y*
- 13.05%
- 5Y*
- 9.61%
- 10Y*
- —
QMAR
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 2.78%
- YTD
- 13.16%
- 6M
- 14.21%
- 1Y
- 23.95%
- 3Y*
- 16.76%
- 5Y*
- 12.38%
- 10Y*
- —
PMAR vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March | 6.36% | 11.82% | 12.83% | 15.95% | -2.65% | 7.53% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.16% | 10.89% | 16.11% | 35.47% | -16.56% | 12.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between PMAR and QMAR is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021 | 0.84 |
The correlation between PMAR and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
PMAR vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PMAR
QMAR
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
PMAR
QMAR
Financial Services
PMAR
QMAR
Communication Services
PMAR
QMAR
Consumer Cyclical
PMAR
QMAR
Healthcare
PMAR
QMAR
Industrials
PMAR
QMAR
Consumer Defensive
PMAR
QMAR
Energy
PMAR
QMAR
Utilities
PMAR
QMAR
Real Estate
PMAR
QMAR
Basic Materials
PMAR
QMAR
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PMAR vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
PMAR
QMAR
PMAR vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| PMAR | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.01 | 3.95 | -0.94 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.52 | 6.18 | -1.66 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.69 | 1.96 | -0.27 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.90 | 7.61 | -3.70 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.14 | 54.94 | -31.80 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PMAR | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.01 | 3.95 | -0.94 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.18 | 0.89 | +0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.92 | 0.91 | 0.00 |
Drawdowns
PMAR vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PMAR drawdown since its inception was -17.18%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMAR and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PMAR | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.18% | -19.83% | +2.65% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.11% | -3.21% | -0.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.32% | -15.91% | +6.59% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.84% | -19.83% | +8.99% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.09% | +0.09% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.56% | -3.29% | +1.73% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.69% | 0.44% | +0.25% |
Volatility
PMAR vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR) is 0.83%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that PMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PMAR | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.83% | 1.27% | -0.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.14% | 4.84% | -0.70% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.31% | 6.09% | -0.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.17% | 13.97% | -5.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.73% | 13.86% | -3.13% |
PMAR vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
PMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
PMAR vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither PMAR nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
PMAR and QMAR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to PMAR (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMAR dropped -17.18% vs QMAR's -19.83%.
On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.38% vs 9.61% for PMAR. On fees, PMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, PMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 12.38% return vs 9.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.
PMAR and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
PMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for PMAR and 0.90% for QMAR.
QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.95 vs 3.01), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for PMAR and QMAR
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer