QQQG vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QQQG (Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QQQG returned 41.31% vs 23.15% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QQQG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

QQQG vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (QQQG) 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, QQQG achieves a 31.21% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 13.03% return.

QQQG

• 1D: -0.92%
• 1M: 14.49%
• YTD: 31.21%
• 6M: 28.95%
• 1Y: 41.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 2.51%
• YTD: 13.03%
• 6M: 13.97%
• 1Y: 23.15%
• 3Y*: 16.71%
• 5Y*: 12.12%
• 10Y*: —

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

QQQG vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QQQG Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	31.21%	14.72%	2.23%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.03%	10.89%	5.68%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQG and QMAR is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2024	0.84

The correlation between QQQG and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQQG vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQQG	QMAR
Technology	68.6%	54.2%
Healthcare	12.1%	4.2%
Communication Services	10.2%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	3.6%	12.2%
Industrials	2.6%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	1.5%	7.6%
Energy	1.4%	0.6%
Basic Materials	-	1.2%
Financial Services	-	0.2%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Utilities	-	1.4%

Return for Risk

QQQG vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQQG

QQQG Risk / Return Rank: 62
QQQG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
QQQG Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
QQQG Omega Ratio Rank: 60
QQQG Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
QQQG Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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: 98

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.

QQQG vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (QQQG) 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.

	QQQG	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	3.82	-1.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	6.00	-3.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.92	-0.57
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.01	7.24	-4.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.82	52.23	-41.40
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QQQG vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQG Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQG 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

	QQQG	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.11	3.82	-1.71
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.17	0.91	+0.27

Drawdowns

QQQG vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQG drawdown since its inception was -23.61%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQG and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQG	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.61%	-19.83%	-3.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.79%	-3.21%	-10.58%
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	-0.92%	-0.21%	-0.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.59%	-3.28%	-0.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.83%	0.45%	+3.38%

Volatility

QQQG vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF (QQQG) has a higher volatility of 5.39% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that QQQG'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

	QQQG	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.39%	1.27%	+4.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.05%	4.85%	+11.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.67%	6.08%	+13.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.40%	13.96%	+9.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	23.40%	13.85%	+9.55%

QQQG vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQG vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QQQG Pacer Nasdaq 100 Top 50 Cash Cows Growth Leaders ETF	0.06%	0.06%	0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQG and QMAR in my portfolio?

QQQG and QMAR have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQQG or QMAR?

QQQG has higher volatility (5.39%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQG dropped -23.61% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, QQQG or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QQQG leads with 41.31% vs 23.15% for QMAR. On fees, QQQG is cheaper at 0.49% 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, QQQG or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QQQG has performed better with a 41.31% return vs 23.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQG or QMAR?

QQQG is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

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

What is the main difference between QQQG and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for QQQG and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.82 vs 2.11), 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.