ALLW vs. PMAR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ALLW (State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF) and PMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds - ALLW is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by State Street, while PMAR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 15% Buffer Protect March Series Index. ALLW is actively managed, while PMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, ALLW returned 17.58% vs 14.20% for PMAR. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ALLW charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for PMAR.

Performance

ALLW vs. PMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) and Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with ALLW having a 5.97% return and PMAR slightly lower at 5.76%.

ALLW

• 1D: -1.02%
• 1M: -2.41%
• YTD: 5.97%
• 6M: 5.04%
• 1Y: 17.58%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PMAR

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: 0.13%
• YTD: 5.76%
• 6M: 5.79%
• 1Y: 14.20%
• 3Y*: 12.46%
• 5Y*: 9.25%
• 10Y*: —

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

ALLW vs. PMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF	5.97%	15.44%
PMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March	5.76%	10.42%

Correlation

The correlation between ALLW and PMAR is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2025	0.51

The correlation between ALLW and PMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.51 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ALLW vs. PMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ALLW

ALLW Risk / Return Rank: 50
ALLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
ALLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
ALLW Omega Ratio Rank: 47
ALLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
ALLW Martin Ratio Rank: 57

PMAR

PMAR Risk / Return Rank: 87
PMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
PMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
PMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
PMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

ALLW vs. PMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) and Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ALLW	PMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	2.68	-1.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.16	3.96	-1.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.59	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.44	3.47	-1.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.71	20.17	-10.46

ALLW vs. PMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ALLW Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is lower than the PMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ALLW and PMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ALLW vs. PMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ALLW drawdown since its inception was -8.78%, smaller than the maximum PMAR drawdown of -17.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ALLW and PMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	ALLW	PMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.78%	-17.18%	+8.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.23%	-4.11%	-3.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.32%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-10.84%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.73%	-0.63%	-3.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.25%	-1.55%	+0.30%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	0.71%	+1.10%

Volatility

ALLW vs. PMAR - Volatility Comparison

State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) has a higher volatility of 4.00% compared to Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR) at 1.69%. This indicates that ALLW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ALLW	PMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.00%	1.69%	+2.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.34%	4.41%	+4.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.05%	5.35%	+5.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.71%	8.20%	+4.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.71%	10.71%	+2.00%

ALLW vs. PMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ALLW has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAR's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

ALLW vs. PMAR - Dividend Comparison

ALLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.41%, while PMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
ALLW State Street Bridgewater All Weather ETF	4.41%	4.67%
PMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ALLW and PMAR in my portfolio?

ALLW and PMAR have a correlation of 0.55, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ALLW or PMAR?

ALLW has higher volatility (4.00%) compared to PMAR (1.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ALLW dropped -8.78% vs PMAR's -17.18%.

Which ETF is better, ALLW or PMAR?

On 1-year performance, ALLW leads with 17.58% vs 14.20% for PMAR. On fees, PMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, PMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ALLW or PMAR?

Over the 1-year period, ALLW has performed better with a 17.58% return vs 14.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ALLW or PMAR?

PMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for ALLW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ALLW or PMAR?

ALLW has the higher dividend yield at 4.41%, compared with 0.00% for PMAR.

What is the main difference between ALLW and PMAR?

ALLW is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while PMAR is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for ALLW and 0.79% for PMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 vs 1.60), 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.