PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QBUF vs. BUFQ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QBUF vs. BUFQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBUF achieves a 4.88% return, which is significantly lower than BUFQ's 7.95% return.


QBUF

1D
0.00%
1M
0.41%
YTD
4.88%
6M
4.08%
1Y
11.57%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BUFQ

1D
-1.33%
1M
-0.77%
YTD
7.95%
6M
6.55%
1Y
19.01%
3Y*
16.00%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QBUF vs. BUFQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
QBUF
Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly
4.88%11.08%5.90%
BUFQ
FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF
7.95%14.03%6.33%

Correlation

The correlation between QBUF and BUFQ is 0.82, 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

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2024

0.81

The correlation between QBUF and BUFQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.82 - 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

QBUF vs. BUFQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QBUF
QBUF Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
QBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
QBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
QBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
QBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

BUFQ
BUFQ Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
BUFQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFQ Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFQ Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

QBUF vs. BUFQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


QBUFBUFQDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.05

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.45

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.03

3.54

+1.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.26

17.65

-0.39

QBUF vs. BUFQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QBUF Sharpe Ratio is 2.21, which is comparable to the BUFQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QBUF and BUFQ, 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...

Drawdowns

QBUF vs. BUFQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBUF drawdown since its inception was -8.84%, smaller than the maximum BUFQ drawdown of -15.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBUF and BUFQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QBUFBUFQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.84%

-15.74%

+6.90%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.31%

-5.39%

+3.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.74%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-1.53%

+1.53%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.80%

-2.29%

+1.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.67%

1.08%

-0.41%

Volatility

QBUF vs. BUFQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) is 0.41%, while FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) has a volatility of 2.61%. This indicates that QBUF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QBUFBUFQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.41%

2.61%

-2.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.68%

6.77%

-3.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.25%

8.45%

-3.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.35%

13.31%

-4.96%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.35%

13.31%

-4.96%

QBUF vs. BUFQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QBUF has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFQ's 1.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

QBUF vs. BUFQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither QBUF nor BUFQ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


QBUF and BUFQ have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BUFQ has higher volatility (2.61%) compared to QBUF (0.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBUF dropped -8.84% vs BUFQ's -15.74%.

On 1-year performance, BUFQ leads with 19.01% vs 11.57% for QBUF. On fees, QBUF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QBUF has been the lower-risk option at 0.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BUFQ has performed better with a 19.01% return vs 11.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QBUF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.

QBUF and BUFQ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

QBUF tracks Invesco QQQ Trust, while BUFQ tracks NASDAQ 100 Index - USD. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QBUF and 1.10% for BUFQ.

BUFQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.27 vs 2.21), 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 QBUF and BUFQ

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