PQAP vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PQAP (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - PQAP is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PQAP returned 21.47% vs 23.38% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PQAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

PQAP vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PQAP achieves a 12.09% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

PQAP

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 2.44%
• YTD: 12.09%
• 6M: 13.01%
• 1Y: 21.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 2.81%
• YTD: 13.06%
• 6M: 14.01%
• 1Y: 23.38%
• 3Y*: 16.73%
• 5Y*: 12.13%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PQAP vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	12.09%	14.48%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.94%

Correlation

The correlation between PQAP and QMAR is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2025	0.90

The correlation between PQAP and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PQAP vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

PQAP

PQAP Risk / Return Rank: 98
PQAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
PQAP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
PQAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
PQAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

PQAP vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) 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.

	PQAP	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.86	3.86	+0.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	8.47	6.05	+2.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.20	1.93	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	15.50	7.31	+8.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	86.25	52.66	+33.59
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PQAP vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PQAP Sharpe Ratio is 4.86, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PQAP and QMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PQAP	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.86	3.86	+0.99
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.76	0.91	+0.85

Drawdowns

PQAP vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PQAP drawdown since its inception was -10.79%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PQAP and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PQAP	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.79%	-19.83%	+9.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.39%	-3.21%	+1.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.91%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.12%	-0.19%	+0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.60%	-3.28%	+2.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.25%	0.45%	-0.20%

Volatility

PQAP vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) is 1.02%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that PQAP 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.

Volatility by Period

	PQAP	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.02%	1.27%	-0.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.09%	4.85%	-1.76%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.45%	6.09%	-1.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.03%	13.97%	-2.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.03%	13.85%	-2.82%

PQAP vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PQAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

PQAP vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

PQAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	0.02%	0.02%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PQAP and QMAR in my portfolio?

PQAP and QMAR have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PQAP or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to PQAP (1.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PQAP dropped -10.79% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, PQAP or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 21.47% for PQAP. On fees, PQAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PQAP has been the lower-risk option at 1.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PQAP or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 21.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PQAP or QMAR?

PQAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PQAP or QMAR?

PQAP has the higher dividend yield at 0.02%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between PQAP and QMAR?

PQAP is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PQAP and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PQAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.86 vs 3.86), 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.