QMAG vs. QB

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

QMAG (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August) and QB (ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. QMAG is actively managed, while QB is passively managed. Over the past year, QMAG returned 13.63% vs 18.83% for QB. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QMAG charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for QB.

Performance

QMAG vs. QB - 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 ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMAG achieves a 7.45% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 12.67% return.

QMAG

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.98%
• 6M: 6.67%
• YTD: 7.45%
• 1Y: 13.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QB

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 3.50%
• 6M: 11.39%
• YTD: 12.67%
• 1Y: 18.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QMAG vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QMAG FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August	7.45%	7.34%
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	12.67%	6.10%

Correlation

The correlation between QMAG and QB is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.74

The correlation between QMAG and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QMAG vs. QB — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMAG

QMAG Risk / Return Rank: 75
QMAG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
QMAG Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
QMAG Omega Ratio Rank: 78
QMAG Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
QMAG Martin Ratio Rank: 81

QB

QB Risk / Return Rank: 95
QB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QB Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
QB Omega Ratio Rank: 96
QB Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QB Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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. QB - 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 ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). 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.

	QMAG	QB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.91	2.69	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	3.91	-1.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.64	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.62	5.44	-2.82
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.28	26.25	-13.97

QMAG vs. QB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMAG Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is comparable to the QB Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMAG and QB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

QMAG vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMAG drawdown since its inception was -12.44%, which is greater than QB's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAG and QB.

Drawdown Indicators

	QMAG	QB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.44%	-3.47%	-8.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.23%	-3.47%	-1.76%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.11%	-0.42%	-0.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.11%	0.72%	+0.39%

Volatility

QMAG vs. QB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August (QMAG) is 1.30%, while ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) has a volatility of 2.86%. This indicates that QMAG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QMAG	QB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.30%	2.86%	-1.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.62%	5.82%	-0.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.16%	7.03%	+0.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.65%	6.93%	+3.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.65%	6.93%	+3.72%

QMAG vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison

QMAG has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

QMAG vs. QB - Dividend Comparison

QMAG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.77%.

Position	TTM	2025
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	0.77%	0.48%
QMAG FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QMAG and QB in my portfolio?

QMAG and QB have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QMAG or QB?

QB has higher volatility (2.86%) compared to QMAG (1.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMAG dropped -12.44% vs QB's -3.47%.

Which ETF is better, QMAG or QB?

On 1-year performance, QB leads with 18.83% vs 13.63% for QMAG. On fees, QB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, QMAG has been the lower-risk option at 1.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QMAG or QB?

Over the 1-year period, QB has performed better with a 18.83% return vs 13.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QMAG or QB?

QB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QMAG or QB?

QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.77%, compared with 0.00% for QMAG.

What is the main difference between QMAG and QB?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QMAG and 0.58% for QB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 1.91), 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.