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

Performance

QMAG vs. COMT - 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 iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT). 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 5.86% return, which is significantly lower than COMT's 34.61% return.


QMAG

1D
-0.81%
1M
0.50%
YTD
5.86%
6M
5.92%
1Y
15.85%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

COMT

1D
-2.10%
1M
-3.15%
YTD
34.61%
6M
32.76%
1Y
41.55%
3Y*
15.38%
5Y*
12.66%
10Y*
8.45%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QMAG vs. COMT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
QMAG
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August
5.86%13.16%4.03%
COMT
iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF
34.61%6.07%2.32%

Correlation

The correlation between QMAG and COMT is -0.16, 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

-0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 20, 2024

0.00

The correlation between QMAG and COMT shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. COMT — 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: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAG Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAG Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank

COMT
COMT Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
COMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
COMT Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
COMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
COMT Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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. COMT - 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 iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT). 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.


QMAGCOMTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

1.35

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.04

5.05

-2.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.35

12.11

+2.23

QMAG vs. COMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMAG Sharpe Ratio is 2.21, which is comparable to the COMT Sharpe Ratio of 1.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMAG and COMT, 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


QMAGCOMTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.21

1.94

+0.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.60

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.45

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.21

0.19

+1.02

Drawdowns

QMAG vs. COMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMAG drawdown since its inception was -12.44%, smaller than the maximum COMT drawdown of -51.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAG and COMT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QMAGCOMTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.44%

-51.89%

+39.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.23%

-8.27%

+3.04%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.85%

-8.27%

+7.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.16%

-24.06%

+22.90%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.11%

3.44%

-2.33%

Volatility

QMAG vs. COMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August (QMAG) is 1.05%, while iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT) has a volatility of 6.63%. This indicates that QMAG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QMAGCOMTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.05%

6.63%

-5.58%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.66%

19.03%

-13.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.23%

21.47%

-14.24%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.89%

21.08%

-10.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.89%

18.90%

-8.01%

QMAG vs. COMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

QMAG has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than COMT's 0.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

QMAG vs. COMT - Dividend Comparison

QMAG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.75%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COMT
iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF
5.75%7.74%4.90%5.19%29.79%17.79%0.36%2.61%11.65%5.16%0.52%1.44%
QMAG
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QMAG and COMT have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

COMT has higher volatility (6.63%) compared to QMAG (1.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMAG dropped -12.44% vs COMT's -51.89%.

On 1-year performance, COMT leads with 41.55% vs 15.85% for QMAG. On fees, COMT is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, QMAG has been the lower-risk option at 1.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, COMT has performed better with a 41.55% return vs 15.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

COMT is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAG.

COMT has the higher dividend yield at 5.75%, compared with 0.00% for QMAG.

QMAG is categorized as Defined Outcome, while COMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QMAG and 0.48% for COMT.

QMAG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 1.94), 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 COMT

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