QMFE vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QMFE (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - QMFE is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ) Price Return, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. QMFE is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past year, QMFE returned 20.18% vs 23.38% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.90% expense ratio.

Performance

QMFE vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMFE achieves a 9.21% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

QMFE

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 2.40%
• YTD: 9.21%
• 6M: 9.98%
• 1Y: 20.18%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

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

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

QMFE vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QMFE FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February	9.21%	11.58%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	8.31%

Correlation

The correlation between QMFE and QMAR is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 25, 2025	0.92

The correlation between QMFE and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QMFE vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMFE

QMFE Risk / Return Rank: 89
QMFE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
QMFE Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
QMFE Omega Ratio Rank: 92
QMFE Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
QMFE Martin Ratio Rank: 93

QMAR

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

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.

QMFE vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February (QMFE) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). 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.

	QMFE	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.94	3.86	-0.92
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.31	6.05	-1.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.93	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.21	7.31	-3.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.22	52.66	-28.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QMFE vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMFE Sharpe Ratio is 2.94, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMFE and QMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QMFE	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.94	3.86	-0.92
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.44	0.91	+0.54

Drawdowns

QMFE vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMFE drawdown since its inception was -11.76%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMFE and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QMFE	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.76%	-19.83%	+8.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.81%	-3.21%	-1.60%
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	-0.20%	-0.19%	-0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.09%	-3.28%	+2.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.84%	0.45%	+0.39%

Volatility

QMFE vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February (QMFE) is 1.03%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that QMFE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QMFE	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.03%	1.27%	-0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.53%	4.85%	+0.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.90%	6.09%	+0.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.68%	13.97%	-2.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.68%	13.85%	-2.17%

QMFE vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

QMFE vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither QMFE nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QMFE and QMAR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, QMFE and QMAR move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, QMFE or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to QMFE (1.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMFE dropped -11.76% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, QMFE or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 20.18% for QMFE. Both ETFs have the same 0.90% expense ratio. On volatility, QMFE has been the lower-risk option at 1.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QMFE or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 20.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QMFE or QMAR?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between QMFE and QMAR?

QMFE is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.94), 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.