YJUN vs. QMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

YJUN (FT Vest International Equity Moderate Buffer ETF – June) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - YJUN is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Index, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. YJUN is passively managed, while QMAR is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, YJUN returned 9.88%/yr vs 16.73%/yr for QMAR. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.90% expense ratio.

Performance

YJUN vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest International Equity Moderate Buffer ETF – June (YJUN) 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, YJUN achieves a 4.59% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.

YJUN

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 1.63%
• YTD: 4.59%
• 6M: 5.76%
• 1Y: 9.95%
• 3Y*: 9.88%
• 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*: —

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

YJUN vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
YJUN FT Vest International Equity Moderate Buffer ETF – June	4.59%	18.77%	1.65%	14.81%	-8.13%	0.11%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	13.06%	10.89%	16.11%	35.47%	-16.56%	6.61%

Correlation

The correlation between YJUN and QMAR is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2021	0.63

The correlation between YJUN and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

YJUN vs. QMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	YJUN	QMAR
Financial Services	24.7%	0.2%
Industrials	19.8%	2.8%
Healthcare	10.6%	4.2%
Technology	10.3%	54.2%
Consumer Cyclical	7.7%	12.2%
Consumer Defensive	6.7%	7.6%
Basic Materials	5.9%	1.2%
Communication Services	4.5%	15.5%
Energy	4.0%	0.6%
Utilities	4.0%	1.4%
Real Estate	1.9%	0.1%

Return for Risk

YJUN vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

YJUN

YJUN Risk / Return Rank: 48
YJUN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
YJUN Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
YJUN Omega Ratio Rank: 47
YJUN Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
YJUN Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

YJUN vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest International Equity Moderate Buffer ETF – June (YJUN) 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.

	YJUN	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.54	3.86	-2.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.20	6.05	-3.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.93	-0.64
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.40	7.31	-4.91
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.91	52.66	-43.75
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

YJUN vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current YJUN Sharpe Ratio is 1.54, which is lower than the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of YJUN 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

	YJUN	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.54	3.86	-2.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.87	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.54	0.91	-0.36

Drawdowns

YJUN vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum YJUN drawdown since its inception was -21.53%, which is greater than QMAR's maximum drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for YJUN and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	YJUN	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.53%	-19.83%	-1.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.16%	-3.21%	-0.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.75%	-15.91%	+7.16%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.09%	-0.19%	+0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.79%	-3.28%	-0.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.12%	0.45%	+0.67%

Volatility

YJUN vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest International Equity Moderate Buffer ETF – June (YJUN) is 1.03%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that YJUN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	YJUN	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.03%	1.27%	-0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.61%	4.85%	-0.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.53%	6.09%	+0.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.03%	13.97%	-2.94%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.03%	13.85%	-2.82%

YJUN vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both YJUN and QMAR have an expense ratio of 0.90%.

Dividends

YJUN vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither YJUN nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both YJUN and QMAR in my portfolio?

YJUN and QMAR have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, YJUN or QMAR?

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to YJUN (1.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, YJUN dropped -21.53% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

Which ETF is better, YJUN or QMAR?

On 3-year performance, QMAR leads with 16.73% vs 9.88% for YJUN. Both ETFs have the same 0.90% expense ratio. On volatility, YJUN has been the lower-risk option at 1.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, YJUN or QMAR?

Over the 3-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 16.73% return vs 9.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, YJUN or QMAR?

YJUN and QMAR have the same expense ratio: 0.90% per year.

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

YJUN and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between YJUN and QMAR?

YJUN is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and First Trust.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 1.54), 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.