GMAR vs QQQ
FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Quick Verdict
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ delivered stronger 1-year returns. QQQ offers more diversification with 108 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GMAR | QQQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.18% | |
| AUM | $397M | $496.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.44% | |
| Holdings | 5 | 108 | |
| YTD Return | +9.69% | +16.64% | |
| 1Y Return | +13.66% | +27.27% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.27% | +25.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +14.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.9% | 30.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -9.1% | -83.0% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 17, 2023 | Mar 10, 1999 |
GMAR vs QQQ Performance
FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year GMAR returned +13.66% while QQQ returned +27.27%. Year to date, GMAR is up 9.69% versus a gain of 16.64% for QQQ.
Over three years, GMAR compounded at +12.27% per year against +25.96% for QQQ. Across the full 3-year window we track, QQQ has the edge at +13.03% annualized vs +12.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.6% compared with 4.9% for GMAR. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -9.1% for GMAR and -83.0% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GMAR charges 0.85% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $18 annually, a gap of $67 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GMAR currently yields 0.00% against 0.44% for QQQ.
Holdings Overlap
GMAR and QQQ share 0 holdings out of 103 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GMAR or QQQ?
GMAR has an expense ratio of 0.85% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $67 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GMAR or QQQ?
Over the past year GMAR returned +13.66% vs +27.27% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), GMAR annualized +12.70% vs +13.03% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GMAR or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 30.6% annualized versus 4.9% for GMAR. Worst drawdown: GMAR -9.1% vs QQQ -83.0%.
Should I hold both GMAR and QQQ?
GMAR and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GMAR and QQQ?
GMAR and QQQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 103 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GMAR or QQQ?
GMAR yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.