PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QCJA vs. IBID
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QCJA vs. IBID - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA) and iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCJA achieves a 5.92% return, which is significantly higher than IBID's 2.46% return.


QCJA

1D
-0.09%
1M
2.12%
YTD
5.92%
6M
6.91%
1Y
15.75%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

IBID

1D
0.08%
1M
0.49%
YTD
2.46%
6M
2.57%
1Y
4.83%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCJA vs. IBID - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QCJA and IBID is -0.15, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.15

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 22, 2025

-0.20

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

QCJA vs. IBID — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCJA
QCJA Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
QCJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCJA Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
QCJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCJA Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

IBID
IBID Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
IBID Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBID Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBID Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
IBID Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBID 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.

QCJA vs. IBID - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA) and iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID). 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.


QCJAIBIDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.94

-0.37

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.18

13.33

-10.15

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.46

39.52

-24.06

QCJA vs. IBID - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the IBID Sharpe Ratio of 3.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCJA and IBID, 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


QCJAIBIDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74

3.91

-1.16

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.31

2.56

-1.25

Drawdowns

QCJA vs. IBID - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCJA drawdown since its inception was -10.67%, which is greater than IBID's maximum drawdown of -1.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCJA and IBID.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCJAIBIDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.67%

-1.28%

-9.39%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.98%

-0.36%

-4.62%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.10%

0.00%

-0.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.19%

-0.22%

-0.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.02%

0.12%

+0.90%

Volatility

QCJA vs. IBID - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA) has a higher volatility of 0.83% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF (IBID) at 0.32%. This indicates that QCJA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBID based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCJAIBIDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.83%

0.32%

+0.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.62%

0.80%

+3.82%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.78%

1.25%

+4.53%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.48%

2.25%

+7.23%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.48%

2.25%

+7.23%

QCJA vs. IBID - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCJA has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than IBID's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCJA vs. IBID - Dividend Comparison

QCJA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBID's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.66%.


PositionTTM202520242023
IBID
iShares iBonds Oct 2027 Term TIPS ETF
3.66%4.43%4.24%0.81%
QCJA
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QCJA and IBID have a correlation of -0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCJA has higher volatility (0.83%) compared to IBID (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCJA dropped -10.67% vs IBID's -1.28%.

On 1-year performance, QCJA leads with 15.75% vs 4.83% for IBID. On fees, IBID is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBID has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QCJA has performed better with a 15.75% return vs 4.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBID is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QCJA.

IBID has the higher dividend yield at 3.66%, compared with 0.00% for QCJA.

QCJA is categorized as Defined Outcome, while IBID is Inflation-Protected Bonds. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QCJA and 0.10% for IBID.

IBID currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.91 vs 2.74), 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 QCJA and IBID

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