QMMY vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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

Performance

QMMY vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - May (QMMY) 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, QMMY achieves a 4.05% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 11.40% return.

QMMY

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

QMAR

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

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

QMMY vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

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

Correlation

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

Return for Risk

QMMY vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

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

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.

QMMY vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - May (QMMY) 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.

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.

	QMMY	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	3.19	-1.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.52	4.77	-2.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.74	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.35	6.49	-3.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.89	39.78	-22.89

QMMY vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

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

Drawdowns

QMMY vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

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

Volatility

QMMY vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - May (QMMY) has a higher volatility of 4.19% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 2.92%. This indicates that QMMY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

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

QMMY vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

QMMY vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither QMMY nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QMMY and QMAR in my portfolio?

QMMY and QMAR 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, QMMY or QMAR?

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

Which ETF is better, QMMY or QMAR?

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, QMMY or QMAR?

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, QMMY or QMAR?

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

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

QMMY and QMAR 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.