QYLD vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QYLD (Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. QYLD is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, QYLD returned 8.43%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for QMAR. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QYLD charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

QYLD vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) 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, QYLD achieves a 7.88% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

QYLD

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 1.62%
• YTD: 7.88%
• 6M: 9.97%
• 1Y: 23.93%
• 3Y*: 13.80%
• 5Y*: 8.43%
• 10Y*: 9.80%

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)

QYLD vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	7.88%	9.28%	19.35%	22.77%	-19.08%	8.96%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-16.56%	12.31%

Correlation

The correlation between QYLD and QMAR is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.83
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 23, 2021	0.86

The correlation between QYLD and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

QYLD vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QYLD	QMAR
Technology	53.8%	54.2%
Communication Services	15.8%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	12.3%	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%

Return for Risk

QYLD vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QYLD

QYLD Risk / Return Rank: 88
QYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
QYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
QYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 92
QYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
QYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 94

QMAR

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

QYLD vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) 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.

	QYLD	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.80	3.86	-1.06
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.92	6.05	-2.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.63	1.93	-0.30
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.84	7.31	-2.47
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	28.36	52.66	-24.30
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QYLD vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QYLD Sharpe Ratio is 2.80, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QYLD 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QYLD	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.80	3.86	-1.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58	0.87	-0.30
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.63	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	0.91	-0.32

Drawdowns

QYLD vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QYLD drawdown since its inception was -24.75%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QYLD and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QYLD	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.75%	-19.83%	-4.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.97%	-3.21%	-1.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.06%	-15.91%	-3.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.61%	-19.83%	-4.78%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.75%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.06%	-0.19%	+0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.84%	-3.28%	-0.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.85%	0.45%	+0.40%

Volatility

QYLD vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF (QYLD) has a higher volatility of 1.85% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that QYLD'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

	QYLD	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.85%	1.27%	+0.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.12%	4.85%	+2.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.58%	6.09%	+2.49%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	14.70%	13.97%	+0.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.49%	13.85%	+1.64%

QYLD vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

QYLD vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

QYLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.46%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QYLD Global X NASDAQ 100 Covered Call ETF	11.46%	11.55%	12.50%	11.78%	13.75%	12.85%	11.16%	9.84%	12.44%	7.69%	9.15%	9.42%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QYLD and QMAR in my portfolio?

QYLD and QMAR have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QYLD or QMAR?

QYLD has higher volatility (1.85%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QYLD dropped -24.75% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, QYLD or QMAR?

On 5-year performance, QMAR leads with 12.13% vs 8.43% for QYLD. On fees, QYLD 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.

Which ETF has performed better, QYLD or QMAR?

Over the 5-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 12.13% return vs 8.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QYLD or QMAR?

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

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

QYLD has the higher dividend yield at 11.46%, compared with 0.00% for QMAR.

What is the main difference between QYLD and QMAR?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.80), 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.