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

Performance

QCJL vs. QQQM - 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 Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCJL achieves a 5.19% return, which is significantly lower than QQQM's 20.73% return.


QCJL

1D
0.04%
1M
1.18%
YTD
5.19%
6M
5.63%
1Y
14.55%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QQQM

1D
-0.54%
1M
8.67%
YTD
20.73%
6M
19.22%
1Y
40.83%
3Y*
28.64%
5Y*
17.94%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCJL vs. QQQM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
QCJL
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July
5.19%13.10%4.12%
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
20.73%20.85%6.34%

Correlation

The correlation between QCJL and QQQM is 0.87, 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

0.87

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

0.92

The correlation between QCJL and QQQM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.92 - 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. QQQM — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCJL
QCJL Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
QCJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCJL Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
QCJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCJL Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

QQQM
QQQM Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
QQQM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQQM Sortino Ratio Rank: 7676
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQQM Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
QQQM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQQM Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
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. QQQM - 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 Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM). 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.


QCJLQQQMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.09

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.50

1.44

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.65

3.43

+0.22

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.55

13.15

+5.40

QCJL vs. QQQM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCJL Sharpe Ratio is 2.49, which is comparable to the QQQM Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCJL and QQQM, 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


QCJLQQQMDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.49

2.58

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.29

0.84

+0.45

Drawdowns

QCJL vs. QQQM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCJL drawdown since its inception was -11.18%, smaller than the maximum QQQM drawdown of -35.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCJL and QQQM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCJLQQQMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.18%

-35.04%

+23.86%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.00%

-11.96%

+7.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.70%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-35.04%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.02%

-0.75%

+0.73%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.07%

-8.24%

+7.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.79%

3.11%

-2.32%

Volatility

QCJL vs. QQQM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) is 0.39%, while Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF (QQQM) has a volatility of 4.51%. This indicates that QCJL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCJLQQQMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.39%

4.51%

-4.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.31%

12.06%

-7.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.88%

15.91%

-10.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.47%

22.23%

-12.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.47%

22.11%

-12.64%

QCJL vs. QQQM - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCJL has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQM's 0.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCJL vs. QQQM - Dividend Comparison

QCJL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQQM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.42%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
QCJL
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QQQM
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
0.42%0.50%0.61%0.65%0.83%0.40%0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions


QCJL and QQQM have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QQQM has higher volatility (4.51%) compared to QCJL (0.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCJL dropped -11.18% vs QQQM's -35.04%.

On 1-year performance, QQQM leads with 40.83% vs 14.55% for QCJL. On fees, QQQM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QCJL has been the lower-risk option at 0.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QQQM has performed better with a 40.83% return vs 14.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QQQM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QCJL.

QQQM has the higher dividend yield at 0.42%, compared with 0.00% for QCJL.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QCJL and 0.15% for QQQM.

QQQM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.58 vs 2.49), 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 QCJL and QQQM

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