QMAR vs. QMMY

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) and QMMY (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - May) are both Nasdaq-100 funds from First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QMAR returned 20.76% vs 12.75% for QMMY. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.90% expense ratio.

Performance

QMAR vs. QMMY - 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 FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - May (QMMY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMAR achieves a 11.40% return, which is significantly higher than QMMY's 4.05% return.

QMAR

• 1D: -1.06%
• 1M: -0.77%
• YTD: 11.40%
• 6M: 11.38%
• 1Y: 20.76%
• 3Y*: 15.65%
• 5Y*: 11.30%
• 10Y*: —

QMMY

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: -0.76%
• YTD: 4.05%
• 6M: 3.89%
• 1Y: 12.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QMAR vs. QMMY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	11.40%	10.89%	10.34%
QMMY FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - May	4.05%	15.80%	8.37%

Correlation

The correlation between QMAR and QMMY is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 20, 2024	0.91

The correlation between QMAR and QMMY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QMAR vs. QMMY — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 95
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

QMMY

QMMY Risk / Return Rank: 69
QMMY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
QMMY Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
QMMY Omega Ratio Rank: 69
QMMY Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
QMMY Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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. QMMY - 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 FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - May (QMMY). 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	QMMY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.19	1.76	+1.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.77	2.52	+2.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.74	1.37	+0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.49	3.35	+3.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	39.78	16.89	+22.89

QMAR vs. QMMY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.19, which is higher than the QMMY Sharpe Ratio of 1.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMAR and QMMY, 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

QMAR vs. QMMY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMAR drawdown since its inception was -19.83%, which is greater than QMMY's maximum drawdown of -12.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAR and QMMY.

Drawdown Indicators

	QMAR	QMMY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.83%	-12.82%	-7.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.21%	-3.82%	+0.61%
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	-1.65%	-2.03%	+0.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.26%	-1.13%	-2.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.52%	0.76%	-0.24%

Volatility

QMAR vs. QMMY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) is 2.92%, while FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - May (QMMY) has a volatility of 4.19%. This indicates that QMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMMY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QMAR	QMMY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.92%	4.19%	-1.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.59%	6.15%	-0.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.55%	7.28%	-0.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.01%	11.08%	+2.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.83%	11.08%	+2.75%

QMAR vs. QMMY - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QMAR and QMMY have an expense ratio of 0.90%.

Dividends

QMAR vs. QMMY - Dividend Comparison

Neither QMAR nor QMMY has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QMAR and QMMY in my portfolio?

QMAR and QMMY have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QMAR or QMMY?

QMMY has higher volatility (4.19%) compared to QMAR (2.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMAR dropped -19.83% vs QMMY's -12.82%.

Which ETF is better, QMAR or QMMY?

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 20.76% vs 12.75% for QMMY. Both ETFs have the same 0.90% expense ratio. On volatility, QMAR has been the lower-risk option at 2.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QMAR or QMMY?

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 20.76% return vs 12.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QMAR or QMMY?

QMAR and QMMY have the same expense ratio: 0.90% per year.

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

QMAR and QMMY have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 1.76), 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.