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

Performance

QCJA vs. PQOC - 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 PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - October (PQOC). 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 lower than PQOC's 9.01% return.


QCJA

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

PQOC

1D
-0.05%
1M
3.09%
YTD
9.01%
6M
9.17%
1Y
20.55%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCJA vs. PQOC - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QCJA and PQOC is 0.92, 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

0.92

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

0.94

The correlation between QCJA and PQOC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - 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

QCJA vs. PQOC — 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

PQOC
PQOC Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
PQOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7575
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PQOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
PQOC Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
PQOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
PQOC Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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. PQOC - 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 PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - October (PQOC). 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.


QCJAPQOCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.68

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.47

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.18

3.09

+0.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.46

14.07

+1.38

QCJA vs. PQOC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the PQOC Sharpe Ratio of 2.40. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCJA and PQOC, 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


QCJAPQOCDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74

2.40

+0.34

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.31

1.33

-0.02

Drawdowns

QCJA vs. PQOC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCJA drawdown since its inception was -10.67%, smaller than the maximum PQOC drawdown of -13.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCJA and PQOC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCJAPQOCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.67%

-13.71%

+3.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.98%

-6.68%

+1.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.10%

-0.06%

-0.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.19%

-1.62%

+0.43%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.02%

1.46%

-0.44%

Volatility

QCJA vs. PQOC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA) is 0.83%, while PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - October (PQOC) has a volatility of 1.08%. This indicates that QCJA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PQOC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCJAPQOCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.83%

1.08%

-0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.62%

6.76%

-2.14%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.78%

8.60%

-2.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.48%

12.94%

-3.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.48%

12.94%

-3.46%

QCJA vs. PQOC - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCJA has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than PQOC's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCJA vs. PQOC - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCJA nor PQOC has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, QCJA and PQOC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

PQOC has higher volatility (1.08%) compared to QCJA (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCJA dropped -10.67% vs PQOC's -13.71%.

On 1-year performance, PQOC leads with 20.55% vs 15.75% for QCJA. On fees, PQOC is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QCJA has been the lower-risk option at 0.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, PQOC has performed better with a 20.55% return vs 15.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PQOC is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QCJA.

QCJA and PQOC have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QCJA and 0.50% for PQOC.

QCJA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.40), 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 PQOC

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