PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QCOC vs. IBIC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QCOC vs. IBIC - 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 iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCOC achieves a 6.36% return, which is significantly higher than IBIC's 2.37% return.


QCOC

1D
-0.04%
1M
2.10%
YTD
6.36%
6M
6.44%
1Y
15.00%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

IBIC

1D
0.02%
1M
0.27%
YTD
2.37%
6M
2.51%
1Y
4.54%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCOC vs. IBIC - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QCOC and IBIC is -0.20, 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

-0.20

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 22, 2024

-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

QCOC vs. IBIC — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCOC
QCOC Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
QCOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCOC Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
QCOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6666
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCOC Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

IBIC
IBIC Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
IBIC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IBIC Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
IBIC Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
IBIC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
IBIC Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

QCOC vs. IBIC - 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 iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC). 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.


QCOCIBICDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.50

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-5.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.53

2.24

-0.72

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.25

17.27

-14.02

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.79

67.45

-52.66

QCOC vs. IBIC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCOC Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is lower than the IBIC Sharpe Ratio of 5.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCOC and IBIC, 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


QCOCIBICDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.55

5.05

-2.50

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.32

3.49

-2.17

Drawdowns

QCOC vs. IBIC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCOC drawdown since its inception was -10.45%, which is greater than IBIC's maximum drawdown of -0.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCOC and IBIC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCOCIBICDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.45%

-0.90%

-9.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.64%

-0.26%

-4.38%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.15%

-0.13%

-0.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.07%

-0.10%

-0.97%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.02%

0.07%

+0.95%

Volatility

QCOC vs. IBIC - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October (QCOC) has a higher volatility of 0.89% compared to iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF (IBIC) at 0.33%. This indicates that QCOC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IBIC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCOCIBICDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.89%

0.33%

+0.56%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.92%

0.67%

+4.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.91%

0.90%

+5.01%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.40%

1.58%

+7.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.40%

1.58%

+7.82%

QCOC vs. IBIC - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCOC has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than IBIC's 0.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCOC vs. IBIC - Dividend Comparison

QCOC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBIC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.59%.


PositionTTM202520242023
IBIC
iShares iBonds Oct 2026 Term TIPS ETF
3.59%4.43%4.65%0.83%
QCOC
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QCOC and IBIC have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QCOC has higher volatility (0.89%) compared to IBIC (0.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCOC dropped -10.45% vs IBIC's -0.90%.

On 1-year performance, QCOC leads with 15.00% vs 4.54% for IBIC. On fees, IBIC is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, IBIC has been the lower-risk option at 0.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QCOC has performed better with a 15.00% return vs 4.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

IBIC is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QCOC.

IBIC has the higher dividend yield at 3.59%, compared with 0.00% for QCOC.

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

IBIC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.05 vs 2.55), 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 QCOC and IBIC

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