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

Performance

QMAR vs. SAMT - 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 Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

QMAR vs. SAMT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
1.87%10.89%16.11%35.47%-13.09%
SAMT
Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF
1.97%33.10%28.15%1.27%-6.59%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMAR achieves a 1.87% return, which is significantly lower than SAMT's 1.97% return.


QMAR

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

SAMT

1D
2.00%
1M
-1.60%
YTD
1.97%
6M
6.10%
1Y
35.45%
3Y*
22.13%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


QMAR vs. SAMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

QMAR has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than SAMT's 0.66% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

QMAR vs. SAMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank

SAMT
SAMT Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
SAMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SAMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
SAMT Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
SAMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
SAMT Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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. SAMT - 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 Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT). 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.


QMARSAMTDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.43

2.01

-0.59

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.27

2.65

-0.39

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.36

+0.10

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.03

4.10

-2.07

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

14.07

11.61

+2.46

QMAR vs. SAMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMAR Sharpe Ratio is 1.43, which is comparable to the SAMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMAR and SAMT, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QMARSAMTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.43

2.01

-0.59

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

0.76

+0.01

Correlation

The correlation between QMAR and SAMT is 0.65, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.


Dividends

QMAR vs. SAMT - Dividend Comparison

QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SAMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.69%.


TTM2025202420232022
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SAMT
Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF
0.69%0.70%1.40%1.49%0.73%

Drawdowns

QMAR vs. SAMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMAR drawdown since its inception was -19.83%, roughly equal to the maximum SAMT drawdown of -20.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMAR and SAMT.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


QMARSAMTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.83%

-20.57%

+0.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.23%

-8.76%

-0.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.88%

-5.78%

+4.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.40%

-8.00%

+4.60%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.33%

3.10%

-1.77%

Volatility

QMAR vs. SAMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) is 3.50%, while Strategas Macro Thematic Opportunities ETF (SAMT) has a volatility of 4.97%. This indicates that QMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SAMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


QMARSAMTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.50%

4.97%

-1.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.62%

11.91%

-7.29%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.25%

17.68%

-4.43%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

14.05%

16.78%

-2.73%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.03%

16.78%

-2.75%