QCAP vs. QCJL

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

QCAP (FT Vest NASDAQ-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - April) and QCJL (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QCAP returned 7.98% vs 10.53% for QCJL. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.90% expense ratio.

Performance

QCAP vs. QCJL - 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 FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCAP achieves a 4.16% return, which is significantly lower than QCJL's 5.91% return.

QCAP

• 1D: 0.37%
• 1M: -0.24%
• 6M: 3.70%
• YTD: 4.16%
• 1Y: 7.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.82%

QCJL

• 1D: 0.32%
• 1M: 0.28%
• 6M: 5.30%
• YTD: 5.91%
• 1Y: 10.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.67%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QCAP FT Vest NASDAQ-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - April	$301.74K	$289.61K	$395.99K
QCJL FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July	$2.17M	$1.31M	$590.77K

QCAP vs. QCJL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QCAP FT Vest NASDAQ-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - April	4.16%	7.13%	4.73%
QCJL FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July	5.91%	13.10%	4.38%

Correlation

The correlation between QCAP and QCJL is 0.72, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 22, 2024	0.82

The correlation between QCAP and QCJL shifts across timeframes, from 0.72 (1 year) to 0.82 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

QCAP vs. QCJL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QCAP

QCAP Risk / Return Rank: 85
QCAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
QCAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QCAP Omega Ratio Rank: 90
QCAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
QCAP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

QCJL

QCJL Risk / Return Rank: 83
QCJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
QCJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
QCJL Omega Ratio Rank: 85
QCJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
QCJL Martin Ratio Rank: 88

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QCAP vs. QCJL - 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 FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL). 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.

	QCAP	QCJL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.85	1.86	-0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.70	2.75	-0.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.37	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.00	2.74	+0.26
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.28	13.25	+3.03

QCAP vs. QCJL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCAP Sharpe Ratio is 1.85, which is comparable to the QCJL Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCAP and QCJL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

QCAP vs. QCJL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCAP drawdown since its inception was -9.17%, smaller than the maximum QCJL drawdown of -11.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCAP and QCJL.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCAP	QCJL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.17%	-11.18%	+2.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.58%	-4.00%	+1.42%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-0.91%	-0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.55%	-1.01%	+0.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.48%	0.83%	-0.35%

Volatility

QCAP vs. QCJL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest NASDAQ-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - April (QCAP) is 2.11%, while FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) has a volatility of 2.32%. This indicates that QCAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QCJL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCAP	QCJL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.11%	2.32%	-0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.88%	4.58%	-0.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.20%	5.94%	-1.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.71%	9.24%	-0.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.71%	9.24%	-0.53%

QCAP vs. QCJL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QCAP and QCJL have an expense ratio of 0.90%.

Dividends

QCAP vs. QCJL - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCAP nor QCJL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCAP and QCJL in my portfolio?

QCAP and QCJL have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QCAP or QCJL?

QCJL has higher volatility (2.32%) compared to QCAP (2.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCAP dropped -9.17% vs QCJL's -11.18%.

Which ETF is better, QCAP or QCJL?

On 1-year performance, QCJL leads with 10.53% vs 7.98% for QCAP. Both ETFs have the same 0.90% expense ratio. On volatility, QCAP has been the lower-risk option at 2.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCAP or QCJL?

Over the 1-year period, QCJL has performed better with a 10.53% return vs 7.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCAP or QCJL?

QCAP and QCJL have the same expense ratio: 0.90% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QCAP or QCJL?

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

What is the main difference between QCAP and QCJL?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and First Trust.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QCJL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.85), 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.