QDTY vs. QBUF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QDTY (YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF) and QBUF (Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. QDTY is actively managed, while QBUF is passively managed. Over the past year, QDTY returned 39.98% vs 11.93% for QBUF. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QDTY charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QBUF.

Performance

QDTY vs. QBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTY) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDTY achieves a 16.37% return, which is significantly higher than QBUF's 4.68% return.

QDTY

• 1D: 0.06%
• 1M: 9.62%
• YTD: 16.37%
• 6M: 16.71%
• 1Y: 39.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QBUF

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.84%
• YTD: 4.68%
• 6M: 4.57%
• 1Y: 11.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QDTY vs. QBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QDTY YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	16.37%	11.37%
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	4.68%	8.41%

Correlation

The correlation between QDTY and QBUF is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025	0.75

The correlation between QDTY and QBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

QDTY vs. QBUF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QDTY	QBUF
Technology	53.7%	50.7%
Communication Services	15.8%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	12.5%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	8.7%
Healthcare	4.2%	5.1%
Industrials	3.1%	3.3%
Utilities	1.4%	1.6%
Basic Materials	1.1%	1.3%
Energy	0.6%	0.7%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

QDTY vs. QBUF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDTY

QDTY Risk / Return Rank: 75
QDTY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
QDTY Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
QDTY Omega Ratio Rank: 76
QDTY Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
QDTY Martin Ratio Rank: 71

QBUF

QBUF Risk / Return Rank: 79
QBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
QBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 80
QBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
QBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

QDTY vs. QBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTY) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF). 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.

	QDTY	QBUF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	2.28	+0.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.41	3.20	+0.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.48	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.62	5.19	-1.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.27	17.79	-4.53
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QDTY vs. QBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDTY Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is comparable to the QBUF Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDTY and QBUF, 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

	QDTY	QBUF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.65	2.28	+0.37
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.86	1.36	-0.50

Drawdowns

QDTY vs. QBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDTY drawdown since its inception was -23.45%, which is greater than QBUF's maximum drawdown of -8.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDTY and QBUF.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDTY	QBUF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.45%	-8.84%	-14.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.10%	-2.31%	-8.79%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.01%	+0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.48%	-0.82%	-3.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.02%	0.67%	+2.35%

Volatility

QDTY vs. QBUF - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF (QDTY) has a higher volatility of 3.29% compared to Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) at 0.23%. This indicates that QDTY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDTY	QBUF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.29%	0.23%	+3.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.77%	3.88%	+7.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.18%	5.25%	+9.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.87%	8.47%	+17.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.87%	8.47%	+17.40%

QDTY vs. QBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDTY has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than QBUF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDTY vs. QBUF - Dividend Comparison

QDTY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 30.90%, while QBUF has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	0.00%	0.00%
QDTY YieldMax Nasdaq 100 0DTE Covered Call Strategy ETF	30.90%	26.82%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDTY and QBUF in my portfolio?

QDTY and QBUF have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QDTY or QBUF?

QDTY has higher volatility (3.29%) compared to QBUF (0.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDTY dropped -23.45% vs QBUF's -8.84%.

Which ETF is better, QDTY or QBUF?

On 1-year performance, QDTY leads with 39.98% vs 11.93% for QBUF. On fees, QBUF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QBUF has been the lower-risk option at 0.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QDTY or QBUF?

Over the 1-year period, QDTY has performed better with a 39.98% return vs 11.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDTY or QBUF?

QBUF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for QDTY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QDTY or QBUF?

QDTY has the higher dividend yield at 30.90%, compared with 0.00% for QBUF.

What is the main difference between QDTY and QBUF?

They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for QDTY and 0.79% for QBUF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QDTY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 2.28), 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.