QSIX vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QSIX (Pacer Metarus Nasdaq 100 Dividend Multiplier 600 ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. QSIX is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past year, QSIX returned 32.02% vs 20.76% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QSIX charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

QSIX vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Metarus Nasdaq 100 Dividend Multiplier 600 ETF (QSIX) 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, QSIX achieves a 15.33% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 11.40% return.

QSIX

• 1D: -2.89%
• 1M: -0.31%
• YTD: 15.33%
• 6M: 13.92%
• 1Y: 32.02%
• 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)

QSIX vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QSIX Pacer Metarus Nasdaq 100 Dividend Multiplier 600 ETF	15.33%	18.54%	4.81%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	11.40%	10.89%	4.53%

Correlation

The correlation between QSIX and QMAR is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2024	0.92

The correlation between QSIX and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QSIX vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QSIX

QSIX Risk / Return Rank: 64
QSIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
QSIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
QSIX Omega Ratio Rank: 62
QSIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QSIX Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

QSIX vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Metarus Nasdaq 100 Dividend Multiplier 600 ETF (QSIX) 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.

	QSIX	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.96	3.19	-1.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.60	4.77	-2.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.74	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.91	6.49	-3.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.01	39.78	-28.77

QSIX vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QSIX Sharpe Ratio is 1.96, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QSIX 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

QSIX vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QSIX drawdown since its inception was -20.72%, roughly equal to the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QSIX and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QSIX	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.72%	-19.83%	-0.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.05%	-3.21%	-7.84%
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	-3.91%	-1.65%	-2.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.05%	-3.26%	+0.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.92%	0.52%	+2.40%

Volatility

QSIX vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Pacer Metarus Nasdaq 100 Dividend Multiplier 600 ETF (QSIX) has a higher volatility of 8.16% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 2.92%. This indicates that QSIX'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

	QSIX	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.16%	2.92%	+5.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.28%	5.59%	+7.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.41%	6.55%	+9.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.76%	14.01%	+5.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.76%	13.83%	+5.93%

QSIX vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QSIX has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

QSIX vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

QSIX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.96%, 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%
QSIX Pacer Metarus Nasdaq 100 Dividend Multiplier 600 ETF	3.96%	4.02%	1.07%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QSIX and QMAR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, QSIX 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 is riskier, QSIX or QMAR?

QSIX has higher volatility (8.16%) compared to QMAR (2.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QSIX dropped -20.72% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, QSIX or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QSIX leads with 32.02% vs 20.76% for QMAR. On fees, QSIX is cheaper at 0.60% per year. 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, QSIX or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QSIX has performed better with a 32.02% return vs 20.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QSIX or QMAR?

QSIX is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

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

QSIX has the higher dividend yield at 3.96%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between QSIX and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QSIX and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 1.96), 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.