QMAR vs. BLCR

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) and Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF (BLCR).

QMAR and BLCR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. QMAR is an actively managed fund by First Trust. It was launched on Mar 19, 2021. BLCR is an actively managed fund by BlackRock. It was launched on Oct 24, 2023.

Performance

QMAR vs. BLCR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) and Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF (BLCR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

QMAR vs. BLCR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	1.87%	10.89%	16.11%	8.65%
BLCR Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF	-3.06%	30.93%	17.07%	14.18%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMAR achieves a 1.87% return, which is significantly higher than BLCR's -3.06% return.

QMAR

• 1D: 2.41%
• 1M: 0.75%
• YTD: 1.87%
• 6M: 4.47%
• 1Y: 18.84%
• 3Y*: 14.87%
• 5Y*: 10.44%
• 10Y*: —

BLCR

• 1D: 3.51%
• 1M: -5.06%
• YTD: -3.06%
• 6M: 2.52%
• 1Y: 34.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QMAR vs. BLCR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QMAR has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than BLCR's 0.36% expense ratio.

QMAR

FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March

BLCR

Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF

Return for Risk

QMAR vs. BLCR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 85
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

BLCR

BLCR Risk / Return Rank: 87
BLCR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BLCR Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
BLCR Omega Ratio Rank: 85
BLCR Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
BLCR Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

QMAR vs. BLCR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) and Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF (BLCR). 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.

	QMAR	BLCR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.43	1.64	-0.22
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.27	2.29	-0.02
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.34	+0.12
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.03	2.89	-0.86
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.07	12.09	+1.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QMAR vs. BLCR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMAR Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the BLCR Sharpe Ratio of 1.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMAR and BLCR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QMAR	BLCR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.43	1.64	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.76	1.40	-0.63

Correlation

The correlation between QMAR and BLCR is 0.79, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

QMAR vs. BLCR - Dividend Comparison

QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BLCR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.28%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BLCR Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF	0.28%	0.33%	0.75%	0.13%

Drawdowns

QMAR vs. BLCR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMAR drawdown since its inception was -19.83%, smaller than the maximum BLCR drawdown of -21.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAR and BLCR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QMAR	BLCR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.83%	-21.29%	+1.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.23%	-12.13%	+2.90%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.83%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.88%	-7.11%	+6.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.40%	-2.28%	-1.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.33%	2.90%	-1.57%

Volatility

QMAR vs. BLCR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) is 3.50%, while Blackrock Large Cap Core ETF (BLCR) has a volatility of 7.06%. This indicates that QMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BLCR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QMAR	BLCR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.50%	7.06%	-3.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.62%	12.45%	-7.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.25%	21.12%	-7.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.05%	17.59%	-3.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.03%	17.59%	-3.56%