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

Performance

QCAP vs. QBUF - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCAP achieves a 3.99% return, which is significantly lower than QBUF's 4.88% return.


QCAP

1D
-0.96%
1M
-0.56%
YTD
3.99%
6M
4.11%
1Y
9.34%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QBUF

1D
0.00%
1M
0.41%
YTD
4.88%
6M
4.08%
1Y
11.57%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCAP vs. QBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QCAP and QBUF is 0.70, 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

0.70

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

0.77

The correlation between QCAP and QBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.77 - 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

QCAP vs. QBUF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCAP
QCAP Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
QCAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
QCAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

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
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.

QCAP vs. QBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


QCAPQBUFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.38

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.64

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.64

1.47

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.46

5.03

-0.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

32.54

17.26

+15.28

QCAP vs. QBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCAP Sharpe Ratio is 2.60, which is comparable to the QBUF Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCAP and QBUF, 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

QCAP vs. QBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCAP drawdown since its inception was -9.17%, roughly equal to the maximum QBUF drawdown of -8.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCAP and QBUF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCAPQBUFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.17%

-8.84%

-0.33%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.10%

-2.31%

+0.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.26%

0.00%

-1.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.53%

-0.80%

+0.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.29%

0.67%

-0.38%

Volatility

QCAP vs. QBUF - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest NASDAQ-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - April (QCAP) has a higher volatility of 2.66% compared to Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) at 0.41%. This indicates that QCAP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCAPQBUFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.66%

0.41%

+2.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.19%

3.68%

-0.49%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.63%

5.25%

-1.62%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.79%

8.35%

+0.44%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.79%

8.35%

+0.44%

QCAP vs. QBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCAP has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than QBUF's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCAP vs. QBUF - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCAP nor QBUF has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


QCAP and QBUF have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCAP has higher volatility (2.66%) compared to QBUF (0.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCAP dropped -9.17% vs QBUF's -8.84%.

On 1-year performance, QBUF leads with 11.57% vs 9.34% for QCAP. 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, QBUF has performed better with a 11.57% return vs 9.34%. 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 0.90% for QCAP.

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

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

QCAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 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 QCAP and QBUF

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