SGLC vs. QMAR

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (SGLC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR).

SGLC and QMAR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. SGLC is an actively managed fund by Summit Global Investments. It was launched on Mar 30, 2023. QMAR is an actively managed fund by First Trust. It was launched on Mar 19, 2021.

Performance

SGLC vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (SGLC) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

SGLC vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SGLC SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF	-2.12%	17.30%	20.19%	18.93%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	2.45%	10.89%	16.11%	15.55%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SGLC achieves a -2.12% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 2.45% return.

SGLC

• 1D: 1.11%
• 1M: -3.14%
• YTD: -2.12%
• 6M: 2.14%
• 1Y: 20.61%
• 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)

SGLC vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

SGLC has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

QMAR

FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March

SGLC

SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF

Return for Risk

SGLC vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

SGLC

SGLC Risk / Return Rank: 60
SGLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
SGLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
SGLC Omega Ratio Rank: 61
SGLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
SGLC Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

SGLC vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (SGLC) 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.

	SGLC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.07	1.44	-0.38
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	2.29	-0.71
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.47	-0.23
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.73	2.11	-0.38
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.51	14.64	-7.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SGLC vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SGLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.07, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SGLC 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

	SGLC	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.07	1.44	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.76	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.12	0.77	+0.34

Correlation

The correlation between SGLC and QMAR is 0.79, 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

SGLC vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

SGLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.24%, while QMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
SGLC SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF	0.24%	0.23%	8.68%	1.49%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

SGLC vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SGLC drawdown since its inception was -20.24%, roughly equal to the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLC and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	SGLC	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.24%	-19.83%	-0.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.16%	-9.23%	-2.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.19%	-0.32%	-5.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.54%	-3.39%	+0.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.80%	1.33%	+1.47%

Volatility

SGLC vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (SGLC) has a higher volatility of 6.04% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 3.53%. This indicates that SGLC'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

	SGLC	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.04%	3.53%	+2.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.11%	4.65%	+6.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.40%	13.26%	+6.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.18%	14.04%	+2.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.18%	14.02%	+2.16%