QXQ vs. QMAR

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

QXQ (SGI Enhanced Nasdaq-100 ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QXQ returned 28.05% vs 19.26% for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. QXQ charges 0.98%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

QXQ vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SGI Enhanced Nasdaq-100 ETF (QXQ) 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, QXQ achieves a 13.63% return, which is significantly higher than QMAR's 12.60% return.

QXQ

• 1D: 1.59%
• 1M: -1.86%
• 6M: 11.58%
• YTD: 13.63%
• 1Y: 28.05%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 20.65%

QMAR

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: 0.65%
• 6M: 11.79%
• YTD: 12.60%
• 1Y: 19.26%
• 3Y*: 15.58%
• 5Y*: 11.18%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.14%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	$331.81K	$318.22K	$438.70K
QXQ SGI Enhanced Nasdaq-100 ETF	$1.32M	$762.04K	$467.23K

QXQ vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QXQ SGI Enhanced Nasdaq-100 ETF	13.63%	19.78%	9.70%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	12.60%	10.89%	6.78%

Correlation

The correlation between QXQ and QMAR is 0.93, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024	0.91

The correlation between QXQ and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

QXQ vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QXQ	QMAR
Technology	60.8%	60.2%
Communication Services	13.0%	13.3%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	10.9%
Consumer Defensive	6.2%	6.5%
Healthcare	3.6%	3.6%
Industrials	2.9%	2.7%
Utilities	1.1%	1.2%
Basic Materials	1.0%	1.0%
Energy	0.5%	0.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

QXQ vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QXQ

QXQ Risk / Return Rank: 56
QXQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
QXQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
QXQ Omega Ratio Rank: 51
QXQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
QXQ Martin Ratio Rank: 58

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QXQ vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SGI Enhanced Nasdaq-100 ETF (QXQ) 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.

	QXQ	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.48	2.78	-1.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.04	4.18	-2.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.60	-0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.31	6.02	-3.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.53	28.19	-20.66

QXQ vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QXQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QXQ 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

QXQ vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QXQ drawdown since its inception was -22.53%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QXQ and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QXQ	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.53%	-19.83%	-2.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.20%	-3.21%	-8.99%
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	-6.27%	-0.59%	-5.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.71%	-3.22%	-0.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.74%	0.68%	+3.06%

Volatility

QXQ vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

SGI Enhanced Nasdaq-100 ETF (QXQ) has a higher volatility of 7.06% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 2.62%. This indicates that QXQ'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

	QXQ	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.06%	2.62%	+4.44%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.79%	6.18%	+9.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.14%	6.98%	+12.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.24%	14.05%	+8.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.24%	13.74%	+8.50%

QXQ vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QXQ has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is higher than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

QXQ vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

QXQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 15.78%, 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%
QXQ SGI Enhanced Nasdaq-100 ETF	15.78%	18.21%	1.97%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QXQ and QMAR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, QXQ 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, QXQ or QMAR?

QXQ has higher volatility (7.06%) compared to QMAR (2.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QXQ dropped -22.53% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, QXQ or QMAR?

On 1-year performance, QXQ leads with 28.05% vs 19.26% for QMAR. On fees, QMAR is cheaper at 0.90% per year. On volatility, QMAR has been the lower-risk option at 2.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QXQ or QMAR?

Over the 1-year period, QXQ has performed better with a 28.05% return vs 19.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QXQ or QMAR?

QMAR is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for QXQ.

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

QXQ has the higher dividend yield at 15.78%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between QXQ and QMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Summit Global Investments and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for QXQ and 0.90% for QMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.78 vs 1.48), 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.