QQQT vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QQQT (Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QQQT returned 34.63% vs 23.38% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QQQT charges 1.05%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

QQQT vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT) 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, QQQT achieves a 19.45% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 13.06% return.

QQQT

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 9.90%
• YTD: 19.45%
• 6M: 17.66%
• 1Y: 34.63%
• 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)

QQQT vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QQQT Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF	19.45%	14.04%	4.51%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	6.63%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQT and QMAR is 0.88, 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	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2024	0.93

The correlation between QQQT and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

QQQT vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QQQT	QMAR
Financial Services	99.8%	0.2%
Technology	54.2%	54.2%
Communication Services	15.5%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	7.6%
Healthcare	4.2%	4.2%
Industrials	2.8%	2.8%
Utilities	1.4%	1.4%
Basic Materials	1.2%	1.2%
Energy	0.6%	0.6%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

QQQT vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQQT

QQQT Risk / Return Rank: 64
QQQT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
QQQT Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
QQQT Omega Ratio Rank: 72
QQQT Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
QQQT Martin Ratio Rank: 55

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.

QQQT vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT) 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.

	QQQT	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.38	3.86	-1.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.21	6.05	-2.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.93	-0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.73	7.31	-4.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.59	52.66	-43.06
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QQQT vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQT Sharpe Ratio is 2.38, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQT 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

	QQQT	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.38	3.86	-1.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.99	0.91	+0.08

Drawdowns

QQQT vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQT drawdown since its inception was -22.50%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQT and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQT	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.50%	-19.83%	-2.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.73%	-3.21%	-9.52%
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	-0.29%	-0.19%	-0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.01%	-3.28%	-0.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.62%	0.45%	+3.17%

Volatility

QQQT vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT) has a higher volatility of 4.04% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that QQQT'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

	QQQT	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.04%	1.27%	+2.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.20%	4.85%	+6.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.61%	6.09%	+8.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.24%	13.97%	+6.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.24%	13.85%	+6.39%

QQQT vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQT has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is higher than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQT vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

QQQT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.16%, 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%
QQQT Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF	19.16%	21.27%	10.35%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQT and QMAR in my portfolio?

QQQT and QMAR have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QQQT or QMAR?

QQQT has higher volatility (4.04%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQT dropped -22.50% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, QQQT or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QQQT leads with 34.63% vs 23.38% for QMAR. On fees, QMAR is cheaper at 0.90% 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, QQQT or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QQQT has performed better with a 34.63% return vs 23.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQT or QMAR?

QMAR is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for QQQT.

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

QQQT has the higher dividend yield at 19.16%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between QQQT and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Defiance and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 1.05% for QQQT and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.38), 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.