SNAV vs. QMAR
SNAV (Mohr Sector Nav ETF) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - SNAV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Mohr Funds, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, SNAV returned 15.57%/yr vs 16.73%/yr for QMAR. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SNAV charges 1.30%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.
Performance
SNAV vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SNAV achieves a 11.57% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.
SNAV
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- 6.93%
- YTD
- 11.57%
- 6M
- 11.36%
- 1Y
- 25.19%
- 3Y*
- 15.57%
- 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*
- —
SNAV vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
SNAV Mohr Sector Nav ETF | 11.57% | 15.54% | 11.11% | 12.25% |
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 13.06% | 10.89% | 16.11% | 30.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between SNAV and QMAR is 0.79, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.79 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2023 | 0.75 |
The correlation between SNAV and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.
SNAV vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SNAV
QMAR
Technology
Financial Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
SNAV
QMAR
Financial Services
SNAV
QMAR
Healthcare
SNAV
QMAR
Industrials
SNAV
QMAR
Consumer Cyclical
SNAV
QMAR
Communication Services
SNAV
QMAR
Consumer Defensive
SNAV
QMAR
Energy
SNAV
QMAR
Utilities
SNAV
QMAR
Real Estate
SNAV
QMAR
Basic Materials
SNAV
QMAR
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
SNAV vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank
SNAV
QMAR
SNAV vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mohr Sector Nav ETF (SNAV) 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.
| SNAV | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.37 | 3.86 | -1.49 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.21 | 6.05 | -2.84 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.93 | -0.51 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.92 | 7.31 | -3.39 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.09 | 52.66 | -38.57 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SNAV | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.37 | 3.86 | -1.49 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.87 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.11 | 0.91 | +0.20 |
Drawdowns
SNAV vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SNAV drawdown since its inception was -16.61%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SNAV and QMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SNAV | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.61% | -19.83% | +3.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.45% | -3.21% | -3.24% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.61% | -15.91% | -0.70% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.83% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.67% | -0.19% | -0.48% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.51% | -3.28% | +0.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.79% | 0.45% | +1.34% |
Volatility
SNAV vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison
Mohr Sector Nav ETF (SNAV) has a higher volatility of 3.12% compared to FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) at 1.27%. This indicates that SNAV'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
| SNAV | QMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.12% | 1.27% | +1.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.28% | 4.85% | +2.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.68% | 6.09% | +4.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.64% | 13.97% | -0.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.64% | 13.85% | -0.21% |
SNAV vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
SNAV has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
SNAV vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither SNAV nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SNAV Mohr Sector Nav ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.94% | 3.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SNAV and QMAR have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SNAV has higher volatility (3.12%) compared to QMAR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SNAV dropped -16.61% vs QMAR's -19.83%.
On 3-year performance, QMAR leads with 16.73% vs 15.57% for SNAV. On fees, QMAR is cheaper at 0.90% 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, QMAR has performed better with a 16.73% return vs 15.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QMAR is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for SNAV.
SNAV and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
SNAV is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Mohr Funds and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for SNAV and 0.90% for QMAR.
QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 2.37), 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.
Find the right allocation for SNAV 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