QTR vs. FVC
QTR (Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF) and FVC (First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QTR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index, while FVC is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus Five Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QTR returned 22.93%/yr vs 10.91%/yr for FVC. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QTR charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for FVC.
Performance
QTR vs. FVC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with QTR having a 17.64% return and FVC slightly lower at 17.30%.
QTR
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 10.52%
- YTD
- 17.64%
- 6M
- 15.72%
- 1Y
- 33.76%
- 3Y*
- 22.93%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FVC
- 1D
- 1.40%
- 1M
- 11.30%
- YTD
- 17.30%
- 6M
- 17.97%
- 1Y
- 23.41%
- 3Y*
- 10.91%
- 5Y*
- 4.98%
- 10Y*
- 8.62%
QTR vs. FVC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF | 17.64% | 14.52% | 21.46% | 45.53% | -29.94% | 4.16% |
FVC First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | 17.30% | 2.12% | 12.43% | -4.59% | -6.03% | 3.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between QTR and FVC is 0.71, 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 | 0.71 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 27, 2021 | 0.67 |
The correlation between QTR and FVC shifts across timeframes, from 0.67 (all time) to 0.77 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
QTR vs. FVC - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
QTR
FVC
Technology
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
-
Healthcare
Industrials
Utilities
-
Basic Materials
-
Energy
Financial Services
Real Estate
Technology
QTR
FVC
Communication Services
QTR
FVC
Consumer Cyclical
QTR
FVC
Consumer Defensive
QTR
FVC
-
Healthcare
QTR
FVC
Industrials
QTR
FVC
Utilities
QTR
FVC
-
Basic Materials
QTR
FVC
-
Energy
QTR
FVC
Financial Services
QTR
FVC
Real Estate
QTR
FVC
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
QTR vs. FVC — Risk / Return Rank
QTR
FVC
QTR vs. FVC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) and First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC). 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.
| QTR | FVC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.40 | 1.82 | +0.58 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.22 | 2.55 | +0.68 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.37 | +0.04 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.76 | 1.77 | +0.99 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.47 | 6.94 | +2.53 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QTR | FVC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.40 | 1.82 | +0.58 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.31 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.68 | 0.50 | +0.18 |
Drawdowns
QTR vs. FVC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QTR drawdown since its inception was -31.72%, roughly equal to the maximum FVC drawdown of -30.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTR and FVC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QTR | FVC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.72% | -30.96% | -0.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.29% | -13.32% | +1.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.99% | -14.75% | -4.24% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.62% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -30.96% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.24% | 0.00% | -0.24% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.84% | -7.06% | -1.78% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.57% | 3.38% | +0.19% |
Volatility
QTR vs. FVC - Volatility Comparison
Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) has a higher volatility of 4.52% compared to First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF (FVC) at 4.29%. This indicates that QTR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FVC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QTR | FVC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.52% | 4.29% | +0.23% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.68% | 12.37% | -1.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.14% | 12.94% | +1.20% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.10% | 16.30% | +1.80% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.10% | 17.61% | +0.49% |
QTR vs. FVC - Expense Ratio Comparison
QTR has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than FVC's 0.71% expense ratio.
Dividends
QTR vs. FVC - Dividend Comparison
QTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.96%, more than FVC's 1.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FVC First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | 1.92% | 2.57% | 0.78% | 1.89% | 1.50% | 0.09% | 0.21% | 1.07% | 0.24% | 0.63% | 0.67% |
QTR Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF | 15.96% | 18.77% | 0.50% | 0.53% | 0.36% | 1.90% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QTR and FVC have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QTR has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to FVC (4.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTR dropped -31.72% vs FVC's -30.96%.
On 3-year performance, QTR leads with 22.93% vs 10.91% for FVC. On fees, QTR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, FVC has been the lower-risk option at 4.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, QTR has performed better with a 22.93% return vs 10.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QTR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for FVC.
QTR has the higher dividend yield at 15.96%, compared with 1.92% for FVC.
QTR is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FVC is Hedge Fund. QTR tracks NASDAQ-100 Quarterly Protective Put 90 Index, while FVC tracks Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus Five Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for QTR and 0.71% for FVC.
QTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.40 vs 1.82), 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.
Find the right allocation for QTR and FVC
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer