PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XMAR vs. QBUL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XMAR vs. QBUL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) and TrueShares Quarterly Bull Hedge ETF (QBUL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XMAR achieves a 6.66% return, which is significantly higher than QBUL's 2.81% return.


XMAR

1D
-0.15%
1M
1.13%
YTD
6.66%
6M
7.46%
1Y
13.17%
3Y*
11.18%
5Y*
10Y*

QBUL

1D
0.12%
1M
1.73%
YTD
2.81%
6M
2.73%
1Y
6.05%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XMAR vs. QBUL - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between XMAR and QBUL is 0.67, 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

0.67

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024

0.57

The correlation between XMAR and QBUL shifts across timeframes, from 0.57 (all time) to 0.67 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

XMAR vs. QBUL — Risk / Return Rank

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

XMAR
XMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
XMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
XMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

QBUL
QBUL Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
QBUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QBUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
QBUL Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
QBUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
QBUL Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XMAR vs. QBUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) and TrueShares Quarterly Bull Hedge ETF (QBUL). 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.


XMARQBULDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

4.40

1.72

+2.68

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

7.61

2.53

+5.08

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

2.22

1.32

+0.90

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

9.04

2.53

+6.51

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

69.02

5.02

+64.00

XMAR vs. QBUL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XMAR Sharpe Ratio is 4.40, which is higher than the QBUL Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XMAR and QBUL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XMARQBULDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.40

1.72

+2.68

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.13

1.15

+0.98

Drawdowns

XMAR vs. QBUL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XMAR drawdown since its inception was -7.29%, which is greater than QBUL's maximum drawdown of -2.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAR and QBUL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XMARQBULDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.29%

-2.45%

-4.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.48%

-2.45%

+0.97%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.29%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.15%

0.00%

-0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.30%

-0.98%

+0.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.19%

1.24%

-1.05%

Volatility

XMAR vs. QBUL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) is 0.66%, while TrueShares Quarterly Bull Hedge ETF (QBUL) has a volatility of 1.26%. This indicates that XMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QBUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XMARQBULDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.66%

1.26%

-0.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.40%

2.23%

+0.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.01%

3.53%

-0.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.56%

3.78%

+1.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.56%

3.78%

+1.78%

XMAR vs. QBUL - Expense Ratio Comparison

XMAR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than QBUL's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

XMAR vs. QBUL - Dividend Comparison

XMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QBUL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.70%.


Frequently Asked Questions


XMAR and QBUL have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QBUL has higher volatility (1.26%) compared to XMAR (0.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMAR dropped -7.29% vs QBUL's -2.45%.

On 1-year performance, XMAR leads with 13.17% vs 6.05% for QBUL. On fees, QBUL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, XMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, XMAR has performed better with a 13.17% return vs 6.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QBUL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XMAR.

QBUL has the higher dividend yield at 8.70%, compared with 0.00% for XMAR.

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and TrueShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for XMAR and 0.79% for QBUL.

XMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.40 vs 1.72), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XMAR and QBUL

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