Skip to content
etf.net

QBQF vs QMFE

AllianzIM Growth 100 Buffer15 ETF

QBQFBCboe

FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February

QMFEDCboe

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

QBQF −0.16pt a year

QBQF0.74%QMFE0.90%

Avg volume · 30D

QMFE 1.2×the volume

QBQF3.94KQMFE4.9K

QBQF vs QMFE Performance

Jul 31, 2026 – Oct 30, 2026

−0.1%QBQF+2.0%QMFE

Jul 31, 2026 to Oct 30, 2026. QBQF −0.1%. QMFE +2.0%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.1%3%4%Jul 2026Sep 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
QBQF 0.74%, better
QMFE 0.90%
Fund size
QBQF $12M
QMFE $43M
1Y total return
QBQF No data
QMFE +12.2%
Holdings
QBQF 3
QMFE 3
Avg volume (30D)
QBQF 3.94K sh
QMFE 4.9K sh, better
NAV per share
QBQF $25.88
QMFE $24.63
52W range

ETF.net Grade

QBQF: Cost 68, Risk 73, Mission not scored, Tradability 35, Holdings 99, Durability 32. QMFE: Cost 5, Risk 75, Mission not scored, Tradability 53, Holdings not scored, Durability 56.
Pillar letters and Scores for QBQF, QMFE, with each pillar’s weight
PillarQBQFQMFE
Cost30% weightB68HigherF5
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightA73A75Higher
Tradability15% weightD35C53Higher
Holdings10% weightA99Not scored
Durability5% weightD32B56Higher

Rank among Nasdaq-100 Buffer 15% funds

How we build Categories ›
Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. QBQF and QMFE are both graded against the same 15 Nasdaq-100 Buffer 15% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Nasdaq-100 Buffer 15%⁠

Category · 15 funds
See all 15 ›

QBQF ranks 1st and QMFE 14th of 15 funds in the Nasdaq-100 Buffer 15% Category.

  1. Rank 1BQBQFAllianzIM Growth 100 Buffer15 ETFScore 58
  2. Rank 2CNJANInnovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETFScore 54
  3. Rank 8CQQMYCorgi Growth & Technology 15% Structured Buffer ETF - May SeriesScore 40
  4. Rank 14DQMFEFT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - FebruaryScore 36
  5. Rank 15DQMNVFT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - NovemberScore 35

QBQF vs QMFE Holdings

How QBQF and QMFE differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

Shared holdings make up 0.0% of QBQF and 0.0% of QMFE.

Level by level

  • Holdings0 in both0.0%
  • Countryby domicile100%

Sector

No Sector split for QMFE.

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in QBQF and QMFE, widest gap first
CountryMore in QBQFMore in QMFE
United StatesSame weight
CanadaSame weight
NetherlandsQBQF +0.1 points
BrazilSame weight
ChinaSame weight
United KingdomSame weight

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • QBQF101.6%
  • QMFE105.8%

Securities held

  • QBQF2
  • QMFE2

Asset class

QBQF
Equity
QMFE
Multi-Asset

Holdings

  • Only in QBQF2
  • In both0
  • Only in QMFE2

Only in QBQF

2 securities, 100% of QBQF by weight

  • Qqq 12/31/2026 5.55 C96.42%
  • Qqq 12/31/2026 739.70 P4.67%

Only in QMFE

2 securities, 100% of QMFE by weight

  • 2027-02-19 Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 C 6.08103.47%
  • 2027-02-19 Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 P 608.801.72%

Weight gaps

QBQF and QMFE share no securities.

All 5 QBQF holdings⁠All 4 QMFE holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

QBQF vs QMFE Cost

Overpaying QMFE vs QBQF

$2,733

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • QBQF 0.74%

    $14,307

  • QMFE 0.90%

    $17,040

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • QBQF 0.74%
  • QMFE 0.90%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530QMFE $17,040QBQF $14,307

Year by year

YearQBQFQMFEOverpaying
10$1,319$1,593$274
20$5,015$6,015$1,000
30$14,307$17,040$2,733

Expense ratio

  • 0.74%QBQF, cheaper
  • 0.90%QMFE
  • Middle half of Nasdaq-100 Buffer 15% funds
  • Median 0.79%

QBQF 7th cheapest of 15 funds

QMFE 13th cheapest of 15 funds

QBQF vs QMFE Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
QBQF None
QMFE None

Distribution history

QBQFAll QBQF payments⁠

No distribution history available.

QMFEAll QMFE payments⁠

No distribution history available.

QBQF vs QMFE Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
QBQF No dataQMFE 8.1%since Mar 2025
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
QBQF No dataQMFE 1.21since Mar 2025
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
QBQF No dataQMFE −11.8%since Feb 2025
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
QBQF 0.19QMFE 0.59

Popular comparisons

  • QBQFBvsNJANC

    AllianzIM Growth 100 Buffer15 ETF · Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.79%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • QMFEDvsNJANC

    FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February · Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.90% · 0.79%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • QBQFBvsNOCTC

    AllianzIM Growth 100 Buffer15 ETF · Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.79%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • QMFEDvsNOCTC

    FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February · Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.90% · 0.79%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • QBQFBvsNAPRC

    AllianzIM Growth 100 Buffer15 ETF · Innovator Nasdaq 100 Power Buffer ETF - April

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.79%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • QMFEDvsNAPRC

    FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February · Innovator Nasdaq 100 Power Buffer ETF - April

    Expense ratio
    0.90% · 0.79%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.