QNDX vs. QMAR

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

QNDX (SPDR Portfolio Nasdaq 100 ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. QNDX is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. QNDX charges 0.10%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

QNDX vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

QNDX

• 1D: 1.12%
• 1M: —
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 0.69%
• 6M: 12.25%
• YTD: 12.77%
• 1Y: 19.74%
• 3Y*: 15.33%
• 5Y*: 11.39%
• 10Y*: —

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

QNDX vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
QNDX SPDR Portfolio Nasdaq 100 ETF	0.74%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	1.22%

Correlation

The correlation between QNDX and QMAR is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2026	0.97

Return for Risk

QNDX vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QNDX

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

QMAR

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

QNDX vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Portfolio Nasdaq 100 ETF (QNDX) 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.

	QNDX	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.98	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	4.46	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.67	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	6.17	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	34.50	—

Drawdowns

QNDX vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QNDX drawdown since its inception was -3.65%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QNDX and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QNDX	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.65%	-19.83%	+16.18%
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	-2.25%	-0.44%	-1.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.71%	-3.24%	+1.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.57%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QNDX	QMAR	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	22.98%	6.65%	+16.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.98%	14.03%	+8.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.98%	13.78%	+9.20%

QNDX vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QNDX has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

QNDX vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither QNDX nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QNDX and QMAR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, QNDX 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 ETF is better, QNDX or QMAR?

On fees, QNDX is cheaper at 0.10% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QNDX or QMAR?

QNDX is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

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

What is the main difference between QNDX and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for QNDX and 0.90% for QMAR.