QCOC vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

QCOC (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QCOC is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by First Trust, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QCOC returned 14.62% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QCOC charges 0.90%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

QCOC vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October (QCOC) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCOC achieves a 6.36% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

QCOC

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.55%
• YTD: 6.36%
• 6M: 6.24%
• 1Y: 14.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 6M: 1.23%
• 1Y: 2.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QCOC vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QCOC FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October	6.36%	11.18%	1.79%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	0.74%

Correlation

The correlation between QCOC and BAMU is -0.17, 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	-0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 21, 2024	0.00

The correlation between QCOC and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to 0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

QCOC vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCOC

QCOC Risk / Return Rank: 78
QCOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
QCOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
QCOC Omega Ratio Rank: 85
QCOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
QCOC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

BAMU

BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 98
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Omega Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
BAMU Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

QCOC vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October (QCOC) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). 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.

	QCOC	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.44	5.01	-2.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.46	8.84	-5.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	2.43	-0.93
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.16	24.72	-21.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.25	97.90	-83.64

QCOC vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCOC Sharpe Ratio is 2.44, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCOC and BAMU, 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

QCOC vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCOC drawdown since its inception was -10.45%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCOC and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCOC	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.45%	-0.36%	-10.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.64%	-0.12%	-4.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	0.00%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.05%	-0.02%	-1.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.03%	0.03%	+1.00%

Volatility

QCOC vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October (QCOC) has a higher volatility of 1.68% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that QCOC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QCOC	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.68%	0.09%	+1.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.03%	0.40%	+4.63%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.03%	0.58%	+5.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.34%	0.87%	+8.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.34%	0.87%	+8.47%

QCOC vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCOC has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCOC vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

QCOC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BAMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.05%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
QCOC FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCOC and BAMU in my portfolio?

QCOC and BAMU have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QCOC or BAMU?

QCOC has higher volatility (1.68%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCOC dropped -10.45% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, QCOC or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, QCOC leads with 14.62% vs 2.91% for BAMU. On fees, QCOC is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QCOC or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, QCOC has performed better with a 14.62% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QCOC or BAMU?

QCOC is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QCOC or BAMU?

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.00% for QCOC.

What is the main difference between QCOC and BAMU?

QCOC is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QCOC and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.44), 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.