PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QCJL vs. BUFQ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QCJL vs. BUFQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCJL achieves a 2.20% return, which is significantly lower than BUFQ's 3.57% return.


QCJL

1D
0.54%
1M
2.80%
YTD
2.20%
6M
4.41%
1Y
20.65%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BUFQ

1D
0.92%
1M
4.39%
YTD
3.57%
6M
6.91%
1Y
26.91%
3Y*
17.38%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCJL vs. BUFQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
QCJL
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July
2.20%13.10%4.12%
BUFQ
FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF
3.57%14.03%5.58%

Correlation

The correlation between QCJL and BUFQ is 0.86, 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

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2024

0.89

The correlation between QCJL and BUFQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 — 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

QCJL vs. BUFQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCJL
QCJL Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
QCJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCJL Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
QCJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCJL Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank

BUFQ
BUFQ Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
BUFQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFQ Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFQ Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
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.

QCJL vs. BUFQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). 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.


QCJLBUFQDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.96

2.75

+0.21

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.54

4.12

+0.42

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

1.56

+0.05

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

5.55

5.35

+0.20

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

27.03

25.55

+1.48

QCJL vs. BUFQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCJL Sharpe Ratio is 2.96, which is comparable to the BUFQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCJL and BUFQ, 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 graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QCJLBUFQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.96

2.75

+0.21

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.16

1.33

-0.17

Drawdowns

QCJL vs. BUFQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCJL drawdown since its inception was -11.18%, smaller than the maximum BUFQ drawdown of -15.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCJL and BUFQ.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


QCJLBUFQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.18%

-15.74%

+4.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.00%

-5.39%

+1.39%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.15%

-2.39%

+1.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.82%

1.13%

-0.31%

Volatility

QCJL vs. BUFQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) is 3.02%, while FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that QCJL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


QCJLBUFQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.02%

4.53%

-1.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.82%

6.94%

-2.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.04%

9.87%

-2.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.83%

13.55%

-3.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.83%

13.55%

-3.72%

QCJL vs. BUFQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCJL has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFQ's 1.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCJL vs. BUFQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCJL nor BUFQ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments