QQQA vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QQQA (ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dorsey Wright Momentum ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. QQQA is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, QQQA returned 14.74%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QQQA charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

QQQA vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dorsey Wright Momentum ETF (QQQA) 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, QQQA achieves a 65.37% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 13.06% return.

QQQA

• 1D: 2.20%
• 1M: 23.31%
• YTD: 65.37%
• 6M: 67.98%
• 1Y: 88.43%
• 3Y*: 34.58%
• 5Y*: 14.74%
• 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)

QQQA vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QQQA ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dorsey Wright Momentum ETF	65.37%	9.87%	16.17%	24.98%	-29.08%	8.43%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-16.56%	9.29%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQA and QMAR is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 21, 2021	0.81

The correlation between QQQA and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQQA vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQQA	QMAR
Technology	65.2%	54.2%
Communication Services	13.7%	15.5%
Energy	9.1%	0.6%
Healthcare	7.8%	4.2%
Consumer Cyclical	4.2%	12.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	7.6%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Industrials	-	2.8%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

QQQA vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQQA

QQQA Risk / Return Rank: 90
QQQA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
QQQA Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
QQQA Omega Ratio Rank: 87
QQQA Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
QQQA Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

QQQA vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dorsey Wright Momentum ETF (QQQA) 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.

	QQQA	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.41	3.86	-0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.00	6.05	-2.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.93	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.11	7.31	-1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.85	52.66	-29.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QQQA vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQA Sharpe Ratio is 3.41, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQA 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

	QQQA	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.41	3.86	-0.45
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.57	0.87	-0.30
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.91	-0.32

Drawdowns

QQQA vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQA drawdown since its inception was -38.44%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQA and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQA	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-38.44%	-19.83%	-18.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.54%	-3.21%	-11.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-30.84%	-15.91%	-14.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-38.44%	-19.83%	-18.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.19%	+0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.68%	-3.28%	-12.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.88%	0.45%	+3.43%

Volatility

QQQA vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dorsey Wright Momentum ETF (QQQA) has a higher volatility of 10.17% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that QQQA'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

	QQQA	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.17%	1.27%	+8.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.18%	4.85%	+17.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.05%	6.09%	+19.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.83%	13.97%	+11.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.77%	13.85%	+11.92%

QQQA vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQA has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQA vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

QQQA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.06%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQA ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dorsey Wright Momentum ETF	0.06%	0.10%	0.09%	0.34%	0.28%	0.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQA and QMAR in my portfolio?

QQQA and QMAR have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQQA or QMAR?

QQQA has higher volatility (10.17%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQA dropped -38.44% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, QQQA or QMAR?

On 5-year performance, QQQA leads with 14.74% vs 12.13% for QMAR. On fees, QQQA is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, QMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QQQA or QMAR?

Over the 5-year period, QQQA has performed better with a 14.74% return vs 12.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQA or QMAR?

QQQA is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

QQQA has the higher dividend yield at 0.06%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between QQQA and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for QQQA and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 3.41), 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.