QDEC vs. FFEB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QDEC (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December) and FFEB (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February) are both exchange-traded funds - QDEC is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by FT Vest, while FFEB is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by FT Vest. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, QDEC returned 10.93%/yr vs 11.09%/yr for FFEB. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QDEC charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for FFEB.

Performance

QDEC vs. FFEB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December (QDEC) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February (FFEB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDEC achieves a 9.56% return, which is significantly higher than FFEB's 7.65% return.

QDEC

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 3.42%
• YTD: 9.56%
• 6M: 10.79%
• 1Y: 25.54%
• 3Y*: 17.59%
• 5Y*: 10.93%
• 10Y*: —

FFEB

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 2.45%
• YTD: 7.65%
• 6M: 8.55%
• 1Y: 19.32%
• 3Y*: 16.35%
• 5Y*: 11.09%
• 10Y*: —

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

QDEC vs. FFEB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
QDEC FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December	9.56%	18.12%	16.40%	29.29%	-22.26%	17.23%	1.37%
FFEB FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February	7.65%	13.76%	16.64%	19.95%	-7.51%	16.26%	0.66%

Correlation

The correlation between QDEC and FFEB is 0.89, 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	0.89
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 22, 2020	0.86

The correlation between QDEC and FFEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

QDEC vs. FFEB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QDEC	FFEB
Technology	54.2%	36.2%
Communication Services	15.5%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	10.1%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	4.9%
Healthcare	4.2%	8.4%
Industrials	2.8%	8.1%
Utilities	1.4%	2.3%
Basic Materials	1.2%	1.8%
Energy	0.6%	3.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	11.9%
Real Estate	0.1%	1.9%

Return for Risk

QDEC vs. FFEB — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDEC

QDEC Risk / Return Rank: 79
QDEC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
QDEC Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
QDEC Omega Ratio Rank: 83
QDEC Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
QDEC Martin Ratio Rank: 82

FFEB

FFEB Risk / Return Rank: 82
FFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
FFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 88
FFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
FFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

QDEC vs. FFEB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December (QDEC) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February (FFEB). 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.

	QDEC	FFEB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.63	2.73	-0.10
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	3.94	-0.22
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.55	-0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.39	3.39	0.00
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	16.17	18.01	-1.84
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QDEC vs. FFEB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDEC Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is comparable to the FFEB Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDEC and FFEB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QDEC	FFEB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.63	2.73	-0.10
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75	1.03	-0.28
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	0.87	-0.08

Drawdowns

QDEC vs. FFEB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDEC drawdown since its inception was -25.25%, which is greater than FFEB's maximum drawdown of -22.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDEC and FFEB.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDEC	FFEB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.25%	-22.81%	-2.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.58%	-5.73%	-1.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.08%	-11.89%	-4.19%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.25%	-13.85%	-11.40%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.11%	-0.30%	+0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.04%	-2.40%	-2.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.58%	1.08%	+0.50%

Volatility

QDEC vs. FFEB - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – December (QDEC) has a higher volatility of 1.37% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February (FFEB) at 1.24%. This indicates that QDEC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FFEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDEC	FFEB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.37%	1.24%	+0.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.56%	5.56%	+2.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.78%	7.12%	+2.66%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.70%	10.81%	+3.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.61%	13.75%	+0.86%

QDEC vs. FFEB - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDEC has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than FFEB's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDEC vs. FFEB - Dividend Comparison

Neither QDEC nor FFEB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDEC and FFEB in my portfolio?

QDEC and FFEB have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QDEC or FFEB?

QDEC has higher volatility (1.37%) compared to FFEB (1.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDEC dropped -25.25% vs FFEB's -22.81%.

Which ETF is better, QDEC or FFEB?

On 5-year performance, FFEB leads with 11.09% vs 10.93% for QDEC. On fees, FFEB is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, FFEB has been the lower-risk option at 1.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QDEC or FFEB?

Over the 5-year period, FFEB has performed better with a 11.09% return vs 10.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDEC or FFEB?

FFEB is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QDEC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QDEC or FFEB?

QDEC and FFEB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QDEC and FFEB?

QDEC is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FFEB is Defined Outcome. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QDEC and 0.85% for FFEB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FFEB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 2.63), 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.