RVER vs. QMAR

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Trenchless Fund ETF (RVER) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR).

RVER and QMAR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. RVER is an actively managed fund by River1. It was launched on Apr 2, 2024. QMAR is an actively managed fund by First Trust. It was launched on Mar 19, 2021.

Performance

RVER vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

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

RVER vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
RVER Trenchless Fund ETF	-11.21%	5.68%	17.75%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	2.45%	10.89%	12.77%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RVER achieves a -11.21% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 2.45% return.

RVER

• 1D: 4.11%
• 1M: -5.96%
• YTD: -11.21%
• 6M: -14.57%
• 1Y: 4.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 1.34%
• YTD: 2.45%
• 6M: 4.74%
• 1Y: 19.05%
• 3Y*: 15.09%
• 5Y*: 10.57%
• 10Y*: —

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

RVER vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

RVER has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

QMAR

FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March

RVER

Trenchless Fund ETF

Return for Risk

RVER vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

RVER

RVER Risk / Return Rank: 16
RVER Sharpe Ratio Rank: 15
RVER Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
RVER Omega Ratio Rank: 17
RVER Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
RVER Martin Ratio Rank: 16

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 84
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

RVER vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Trenchless Fund ETF (RVER) 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.

	RVER	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.15	1.44	-1.29
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.44	2.29	-1.85
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.06	1.47	-0.41
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.20	2.11	-1.92
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.61	14.64	-14.03
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

RVER vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RVER Sharpe Ratio is 0.15, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RVER and QMAR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RVER	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.15	1.44	-1.29
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.76	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.20	0.77	-0.58

Correlation

The correlation between RVER and QMAR is 0.71, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

RVER vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

RVER's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.92%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025
RVER Trenchless Fund ETF	1.92%	1.71%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

RVER vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RVER drawdown since its inception was -26.21%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RVER and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	RVER	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.21%	-19.83%	-6.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.61%	-9.23%	-12.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-18.39%	-0.32%	-18.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.72%	-3.39%	-2.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.01%	1.33%	+5.68%

Volatility

RVER vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

Trenchless Fund ETF (RVER) has a higher volatility of 8.51% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 3.53%. This indicates that RVER'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

	RVER	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.51%	3.53%	+4.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.04%	4.65%	+12.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	28.27%	13.26%	+15.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.29%	14.04%	+12.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.29%	14.02%	+12.27%