PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QTR vs. QMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QTR vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QTR achieves a 17.64% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 13.06% return.


QTR

1D
-0.24%
1M
10.52%
YTD
17.64%
6M
15.72%
1Y
33.76%
3Y*
22.93%
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)

QTR vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
QTR
Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF
17.64%14.52%21.46%45.53%-29.94%4.16%
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
13.06%10.89%16.11%35.47%-16.56%2.76%

Correlation

The correlation between QTR 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 (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 27, 2021

0.85

The correlation between QTR and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

QTR vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QTR
QMAR

Technology

53.8%
54.2%

Communication Services

15.8%
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

7.7%
7.6%

Healthcare

4.2%
4.2%

Industrials

2.8%
2.8%

Utilities

1.4%
1.4%

Basic Materials

1.1%
1.2%

Energy

0.6%
0.6%

Financial Services

0.2%
0.2%

Real Estate

0.1%
0.1%

Technology

QTR
53.8%
QMAR
54.2%

Communication Services

QTR
15.8%
QMAR
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

QTR
12.2%
QMAR
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

QTR
7.7%
QMAR
7.6%

Healthcare

QTR
4.2%
QMAR
4.2%

Industrials

QTR
2.8%
QMAR
2.8%

Utilities

QTR
1.4%
QMAR
1.4%

Basic Materials

QTR
1.1%
QMAR
1.2%

Energy

QTR
0.6%
QMAR
0.6%

Financial Services

QTR
0.2%
QMAR
0.2%

Real Estate

QTR
0.1%
QMAR
0.1%

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. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTR
QTR Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
QTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7272
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
QTR Omega Ratio Rank: 6868
Omega Ratio Rank
QTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
QTR Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QTR vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) 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.


QTRQMARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.40

3.86

-1.46

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.22

6.05

-2.83

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.93

-0.52

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.76

7.31

-4.55

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

9.47

52.66

-43.18

QTR vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTR Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTR 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QTRQMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.40

3.86

-1.46

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.68

0.91

-0.23

Drawdowns

QTR vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTR drawdown since its inception was -31.72%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTR and QMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QTRQMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.72%

-19.83%

-11.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.29%

-3.21%

-9.08%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.99%

-15.91%

-3.08%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.24%

-0.19%

-0.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.84%

-3.28%

-5.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.57%

0.45%

+3.12%

Volatility

QTR vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) has a higher volatility of 4.52% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that QTR'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QTRQMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.52%

1.27%

+3.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.68%

4.85%

+5.83%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.14%

6.09%

+8.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.10%

13.97%

+4.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.10%

13.85%

+4.25%

QTR vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

QTR vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

QTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.96%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
QMAR
FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QTR
Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF
15.96%18.77%0.50%0.53%0.36%1.90%

Frequently Asked Questions


QTR 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.

QTR has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTR dropped -31.72% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

On 3-year performance, QTR leads with 22.93% vs 16.73% for QMAR. On fees, QTR is cheaper at 0.60% 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.

Over the 3-year period, QTR has performed better with a 22.93% return vs 16.73%. 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 0.90% for QMAR.

QTR has the higher dividend yield at 15.96%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

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

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.40), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QTR and QMAR

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