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

Performance

QMAR vs. COMT - 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 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, QMAR achieves a 13.06% return, which is significantly lower than COMT's 39.67% return.


QMAR

1D
-0.09%
1M
2.81%
YTD
13.06%
6M
14.01%
1Y
23.38%
3Y*
16.73%
5Y*
12.13%
10Y*

COMT

1D
0.78%
1M
-4.35%
YTD
39.67%
6M
39.06%
1Y
47.51%
3Y*
16.86%
5Y*
13.50%
10Y*
9.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QMAR vs. COMT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
13.06%10.89%16.11%35.47%-16.56%12.31%
COMT
iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF
39.67%6.07%5.96%-6.56%19.45%20.56%

Correlation

The correlation between QMAR and COMT is -0.22, 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

-0.22

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.00

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.08

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021

0.08

The correlation between QMAR and COMT shifts across timeframes, from -0.22 (1 year) to 0.08 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QMAR vs. COMT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QMAR
COMT

Technology

54.2%

-

Communication Services

15.5%

-

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%

-

Consumer Defensive

7.6%

-

Healthcare

4.2%

-

Industrials

2.8%

-

Utilities

1.4%

-

Basic Materials

1.2%

-

Energy

0.6%

-

Financial Services

0.2%
100.0%

Real Estate

0.1%

-

Technology

QMAR
54.2%
COMT

-

Communication Services

QMAR
15.5%
COMT

-

Consumer Cyclical

QMAR
12.2%
COMT

-

Consumer Defensive

QMAR
7.6%
COMT

-

Healthcare

QMAR
4.2%
COMT

-

Industrials

QMAR
2.8%
COMT

-

Utilities

QMAR
1.4%
COMT

-

Basic Materials

QMAR
1.2%
COMT

-

Energy

QMAR
0.6%
COMT

-

Financial Services

QMAR
0.2%
COMT
100.0%

Real Estate

QMAR
0.1%
COMT

-

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

QMAR vs. COMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank

COMT
COMT Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
COMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
COMT Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
COMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
COMT Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

QMAR vs. COMT - 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 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.


QMARCOMTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.62

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.93

1.40

+0.54

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

7.31

5.95

+1.36

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

52.66

14.11

+38.55

QMAR vs. COMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.86, which is higher than the COMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMAR 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


QMARCOMTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.86

2.24

+1.62

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

0.64

+0.23

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.91

0.20

+0.70

Drawdowns

QMAR vs. COMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMAR drawdown since its inception was -19.83%, smaller than the maximum COMT drawdown of -51.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAR and COMT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QMARCOMTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.83%

-51.89%

+32.06%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.21%

-8.02%

+4.81%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.91%

-13.31%

-2.60%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.83%

-29.00%

+9.17%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.19%

-4.82%

+4.63%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.28%

-24.07%

+20.79%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.45%

3.38%

-2.93%

Volatility

QMAR vs. COMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) is 1.27%, while iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT) has a volatility of 7.37%. This indicates that QMAR 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


QMARCOMTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.27%

7.37%

-6.10%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.85%

18.80%

-13.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.09%

21.29%

-15.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.97%

21.06%

-7.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.85%

18.89%

-5.04%

QMAR vs. COMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

QMAR vs. COMT - Dividend Comparison

QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.54%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COMT
iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF
5.54%7.74%4.90%5.19%29.79%17.79%0.36%2.61%11.65%5.16%0.52%1.44%
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
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


QMAR and COMT have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

COMT has higher volatility (7.37%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMAR dropped -19.83% vs COMT's -51.89%.

On 5-year performance, COMT leads with 13.50% vs 12.13% for QMAR. On fees, COMT is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, QMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, COMT has performed better with a 13.50% return vs 12.13%. 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 QMAR.

COMT has the higher dividend yield at 5.54%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

QMAR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while COMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QMAR and 0.48% for COMT.

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.24), 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 QMAR 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