QMAR vs. KAT

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) and KAT (Scharf ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust, while KAT is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Scharf Investments. Both are actively managed. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QMAR charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for KAT.

Performance

QMAR vs. KAT - 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 Scharf ETF (KAT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMAR achieves a 12.73% return, which is significantly higher than KAT's 1.41% return.

QMAR

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -0.36%
• 6M: 12.43%
• YTD: 12.73%
• 1Y: 19.40%
• 3Y*: 15.32%
• 5Y*: 11.42%
• 10Y*: —

KAT

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 1.01%
• 6M: -0.53%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QMAR vs. KAT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	12.73%	4.22%
KAT Scharf ETF	1.41%	0.85%

Correlation

The correlation between QMAR and KAT is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 25, 2025	0.41

QMAR vs. KAT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QMAR	KAT
Technology	58.7%	14.3%
Communication Services	14.3%	6.6%
Consumer Cyclical	11.4%	5.0%
Consumer Defensive	6.4%	2.3%
Healthcare	3.7%	22.3%
Industrials	2.6%	14.6%
Utilities	1.2%	-
Basic Materials	1.0%	3.3%
Energy	0.5%	6.6%
Financial Services	0.2%	25.1%
Real Estate	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

QMAR vs. KAT — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

KAT

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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. KAT - 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 Scharf ETF (KAT). 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.

	QMAR	KAT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.93	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.39	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.66	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.06	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	33.86	—	—

Drawdowns

QMAR vs. KAT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMAR drawdown since its inception was -19.83%, which is greater than KAT's maximum drawdown of -9.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAR and KAT.

Drawdown Indicators

	QMAR	KAT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.83%	-9.25%	-10.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.21%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.91%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.83%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.47%	-3.99%	+3.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.23%	-3.46%	+0.23%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.57%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QMAR	KAT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.52%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.81%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.65%	10.56%	-3.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.03%	10.56%	+3.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.77%	10.56%	+3.21%

QMAR vs. KAT - Expense Ratio Comparison

QMAR has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than KAT's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

QMAR vs. KAT - Dividend Comparison

QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while KAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%.

Position	TTM
KAT Scharf ETF	0.08%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QMAR and KAT in my portfolio?

QMAR and KAT have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QMAR or KAT?

On fees, KAT is cheaper at 0.75% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QMAR or KAT?

KAT is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QMAR or KAT?

KAT has the higher dividend yield at 0.08%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between QMAR and KAT?

QMAR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while KAT is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Scharf Investments. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QMAR and 0.75% for KAT.