PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QMAG vs. CAOS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QMAG vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August (QMAG) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMAG achieves a 6.84% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.75% return.


QMAG

1D
-0.05%
1M
0.56%
YTD
6.84%
6M
6.85%
1Y
16.36%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CAOS

1D
0.11%
1M
-0.08%
YTD
0.75%
6M
0.67%
1Y
1.64%
3Y*
3.95%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QMAG vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
QMAG
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August
6.84%13.16%4.71%
CAOS
Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF
0.75%2.55%2.13%

Correlation

The correlation between QMAG and CAOS is -0.32, 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

-0.32

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2024

-0.32

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

QMAG vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMAG
QMAG Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
QMAG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7777
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAG Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAG Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

CAOS
CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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.

QMAG vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August (QMAG) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.


QMAGCAOSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.19

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.44

1.23

+0.22

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.14

2.17

+0.97

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.78

5.23

+9.55

QMAG vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMAG Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMAG and CAOS, 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...

Drawdowns

QMAG vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMAG drawdown since its inception was -12.44%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAG and CAOS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QMAGCAOSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.44%

-3.89%

-8.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.23%

-0.76%

-4.47%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-3.60%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.11%

-1.14%

+1.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.14%

-0.92%

-0.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.11%

0.32%

+0.79%

Volatility

QMAG vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August (QMAG) has a higher volatility of 1.49% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.32%. This indicates that QMAG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QMAGCAOSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.49%

0.32%

+1.17%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.64%

1.05%

+4.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.19%

1.50%

+5.69%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.80%

4.23%

+6.57%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.80%

4.23%

+6.57%

QMAG vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

QMAG has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.


Dividends

QMAG vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

Neither QMAG nor CAOS has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


QMAG and CAOS have a correlation of -0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QMAG has higher volatility (1.49%) compared to CAOS (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMAG dropped -12.44% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

On 1-year performance, QMAG leads with 16.36% vs 1.64% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QMAG has performed better with a 16.36% return vs 1.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAG.

QMAG and CAOS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

QMAG is categorized as Defined Outcome, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QMAG and 0.63% for CAOS.

QMAG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.10), 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 QMAG and CAOS

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