QSPT vs. BUFQ

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

QSPT (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September) and BUFQ (FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds from FT Vest. QSPT is actively managed, while BUFQ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QSPT returned 17.57%/yr vs 15.94%/yr for BUFQ. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QSPT charges 0.90%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for BUFQ.

Performance

QSPT vs. BUFQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September (QSPT) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QSPT achieves a 8.24% return, which is significantly higher than BUFQ's 7.78% return.

QSPT

• 1D: -0.35%
• 1M: -0.35%
• YTD: 8.24%
• 6M: 7.49%
• 1Y: 17.33%
• 3Y*: 17.57%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFQ

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: -0.92%
• YTD: 7.78%
• 6M: 7.28%
• 1Y: 17.85%
• 3Y*: 15.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QSPT vs. BUFQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
QSPT FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September	8.24%	14.58%	16.07%	43.15%	-2.33%
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF	7.78%	14.03%	16.41%	35.51%	0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between QSPT and BUFQ 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2022	0.93

The correlation between QSPT and BUFQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QSPT vs. BUFQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QSPT

QSPT Risk / Return Rank: 62
QSPT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
QSPT Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
QSPT Omega Ratio Rank: 65
QSPT Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
QSPT Martin Ratio Rank: 66

BUFQ

BUFQ Risk / Return Rank: 79
BUFQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
BUFQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
BUFQ Omega Ratio Rank: 81
BUFQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
BUFQ Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

QSPT vs. BUFQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September (QSPT) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). 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.

	QSPT	BUFQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	2.14	-0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.51	3.14	-0.62
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.42	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.41	3.33	-0.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.65	16.49	-5.84

QSPT vs. BUFQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QSPT Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the BUFQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QSPT and BUFQ, 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

QSPT vs. BUFQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QSPT drawdown since its inception was -22.64%, which is greater than BUFQ's maximum drawdown of -15.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QSPT and BUFQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	QSPT	BUFQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.64%	-15.74%	-6.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.23%	-5.39%	-1.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.38%	-15.74%	+0.36%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.55%	-1.68%	+0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.56%	-2.29%	-2.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.63%	1.08%	+0.55%

Volatility

QSPT vs. BUFQ - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF – September (QSPT) has a higher volatility of 3.01% compared to FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) at 2.61%. This indicates that QSPT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QSPT	BUFQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.01%	2.61%	+0.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.81%	6.75%	+1.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.74%	8.43%	+1.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.11%	13.31%	+1.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.11%	13.31%	+1.80%

QSPT vs. BUFQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QSPT has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFQ's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

QSPT vs. BUFQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither QSPT nor BUFQ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QSPT and BUFQ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, QSPT and BUFQ 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, QSPT or BUFQ?

QSPT has higher volatility (3.01%) compared to BUFQ (2.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QSPT dropped -22.64% vs BUFQ's -15.74%.

Which ETF is better, QSPT or BUFQ?

On 3-year performance, QSPT leads with 17.57% vs 15.94% for BUFQ. On fees, QSPT is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, BUFQ has been the lower-risk option at 2.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QSPT or BUFQ?

Over the 3-year period, QSPT has performed better with a 17.57% return vs 15.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QSPT or BUFQ?

QSPT is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QSPT or BUFQ?

QSPT and BUFQ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QSPT and BUFQ?

Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QSPT and 1.10% for BUFQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.14 vs 1.79), 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.