PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PQAP vs. TMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PQAP vs. TMAR - 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 Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PQAP achieves a 12.09% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 14.45% return.


PQAP

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

TMAR

1D
-0.72%
1M
2.73%
YTD
14.45%
6M
15.92%
1Y
28.83%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PQAP vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between PQAP and TMAR is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025

0.60

The correlation between PQAP and TMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

PQAP vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PQAP
PQAP Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
PQAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PQAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
PQAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
PQAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
PQAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

TMAR
TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
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. TMAR - 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 Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.


PQAPTMARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.20

1.77

+0.43

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

15.50

7.95

+7.55

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

86.25

38.42

+47.83

PQAP vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PQAP Sharpe Ratio is 4.86, which is higher than the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PQAP and TMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PQAPTMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.86

3.06

+1.80

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.76

2.25

-0.49

Drawdowns

PQAP vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PQAP drawdown since its inception was -10.79%, which is greater than TMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PQAP and TMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PQAPTMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.79%

-9.93%

-0.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.39%

-3.64%

+2.25%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.12%

-0.72%

+0.60%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.60%

-0.66%

+0.06%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.25%

0.75%

-0.50%

Volatility

PQAP vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) is 1.02%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that PQAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PQAPTMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.02%

4.53%

-3.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.09%

8.17%

-5.08%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.45%

9.47%

-5.02%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.03%

11.42%

-0.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.03%

11.42%

-0.39%

PQAP vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PQAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

PQAP vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

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


Frequently Asked Questions


PQAP and TMAR have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TMAR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to PQAP (1.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PQAP dropped -10.79% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 28.83% 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.

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 28.83% return vs 21.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PQAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

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

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PQAP and 0.95% for TMAR.

PQAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.86 vs 3.06), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PQAP and TMAR

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