QBUF vs. QDEC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QBUF (Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) and QDEC (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. QBUF is passively managed, while QDEC is actively managed. Over the past year, QBUF returned 11.93% vs 25.54% for QDEC. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QBUF charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QDEC.

Performance

QBUF vs. QDEC - 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 Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December (QDEC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBUF achieves a 4.68% return, which is significantly lower than QDEC's 9.56% return.

QBUF

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.84%
• YTD: 4.68%
• 6M: 4.57%
• 1Y: 11.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QDEC

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 3.42%
• YTD: 9.56%
• 6M: 10.79%
• 1Y: 25.54%
• 3Y*: 17.59%
• 5Y*: 10.93%
• 10Y*: —

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

QBUF vs. QDEC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	4.68%	11.08%	5.92%
QDEC FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December	9.56%	18.12%	5.32%

Correlation

The correlation between QBUF and QDEC 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 2, 2024	0.82

The correlation between QBUF and QDEC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

QBUF vs. QDEC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QBUF	QDEC
Technology	50.7%	54.2%
Communication Services	15.8%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	12.5%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	8.7%	7.6%
Healthcare	5.1%	4.2%
Industrials	3.3%	2.8%
Utilities	1.6%	1.4%
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.2%
Energy	0.7%	0.6%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

QBUF vs. QDEC — Risk / Return Rank

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

QBUF

QBUF Risk / Return Rank: 79
QBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
QBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 80
QBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
QBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 85

QDEC

QDEC Risk / Return Rank: 79
QDEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QDEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
QDEC Omega Ratio Rank: 83
QDEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
QDEC Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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. QDEC - 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 Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December (QDEC). 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.

	QBUF	QDEC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	2.63	-0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.20	3.71	-0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.50	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.19	3.39	+1.80
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.79	16.17	+1.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QBUF vs. QDEC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QBUF Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is comparable to the QDEC Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QBUF and QDEC, 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

	QBUF	QDEC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.28	2.63	-0.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.75	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.36	0.78	+0.58

Drawdowns

QBUF vs. QDEC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBUF drawdown since its inception was -8.84%, smaller than the maximum QDEC drawdown of -25.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBUF and QDEC.

Drawdown Indicators

	QBUF	QDEC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.84%	-25.25%	+16.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.31%	-7.58%	+5.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.25%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.01%	-0.11%	+0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.82%	-5.04%	+4.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.67%	1.58%	-0.91%

Volatility

QBUF vs. QDEC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) is 0.23%, while FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December (QDEC) has a volatility of 1.37%. This indicates that QBUF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QDEC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QBUF	QDEC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.23%	1.37%	-1.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.88%	7.56%	-3.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.25%	9.78%	-4.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.47%	14.70%	-6.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.47%	14.61%	-6.14%

QBUF vs. QDEC - Expense Ratio Comparison

QBUF has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QDEC's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

QBUF vs. QDEC - Dividend Comparison

Neither QBUF nor QDEC has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QBUF and QDEC in my portfolio?

QBUF and QDEC 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.

Which is riskier, QBUF or QDEC?

QDEC has higher volatility (1.37%) compared to QBUF (0.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBUF dropped -8.84% vs QDEC's -25.25%.

Which ETF is better, QBUF or QDEC?

On 1-year performance, QDEC leads with 25.54% vs 11.93% for QBUF. On fees, QBUF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QBUF has been the lower-risk option at 0.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QBUF or QDEC?

Over the 1-year period, QDEC has performed better with a 25.54% return vs 11.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QBUF or QDEC?

QBUF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QDEC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QBUF or QDEC?

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

What is the main difference between QBUF and QDEC?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QBUF and 0.90% for QDEC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QDEC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 2.28), 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.