ALLW vs. PMAR
ALLW (SPDR 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 23.78% vs 15.24% for PMAR. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ALLW charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for PMAR.
Performance
ALLW vs. PMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ALLW achieves a 9.20% return, which is significantly higher than PMAR's 6.26% return.
ALLW
- 1D
- -0.76%
- 1M
- 0.91%
- YTD
- 9.20%
- 6M
- 8.47%
- 1Y
- 23.78%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PMAR
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 1.95%
- YTD
- 6.26%
- 6M
- 7.19%
- 1Y
- 15.24%
- 3Y*
- 13.02%
- 5Y*
- 9.51%
- 10Y*
- —
ALLW vs. PMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ALLW SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 9.20% | 15.04% |
PMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March | 6.26% | 11.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between ALLW and PMAR is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.49 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2025 | 0.49 |
ALLW vs. PMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ALLW
PMAR
Technology
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
ALLW
PMAR
Financial Services
ALLW
PMAR
Consumer Cyclical
ALLW
PMAR
Communication Services
ALLW
PMAR
Industrials
ALLW
PMAR
Healthcare
ALLW
PMAR
Consumer Defensive
ALLW
PMAR
Energy
ALLW
PMAR
Basic Materials
ALLW
PMAR
Utilities
ALLW
PMAR
Real Estate
ALLW
PMAR
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
ALLW vs. PMAR — Risk / Return Rank
ALLW
PMAR
ALLW vs. PMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR 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.
| ALLW | PMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.62 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.29 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.65 | -0.24 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.30 | 3.72 | -0.42 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.01 | 22.03 | -8.02 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ALLW | PMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.27 | 2.89 | -0.62 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.17 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.62 | 0.91 | +0.70 |
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ALLW | PMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.79% | -0.09% | -0.70% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.20% | -1.56% | +0.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.70% | 0.69% | +1.01% |
Volatility
ALLW vs. PMAR - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) has a higher volatility of 3.43% compared to Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR) at 0.83%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ALLW | PMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.43% | 0.83% | +2.60% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.71% | 4.14% | +4.57% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.52% | 5.31% | +5.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.54% | 8.17% | +4.37% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.54% | 10.72% | +1.82% |
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 4.28%, while PMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
ALLW SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF | 4.28% | 4.67% |
PMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ALLW and PMAR have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
ALLW has higher volatility (3.43%) compared to PMAR (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ALLW dropped -8.78% vs PMAR's -17.18%.
On 1-year performance, ALLW leads with 23.78% vs 15.24% for PMAR. On fees, PMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, PMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, ALLW has performed better with a 23.78% return vs 15.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for ALLW.
ALLW has the higher dividend yield at 4.28%, compared with 0.00% for 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.
PMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.89 vs 2.27), 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.
Find the right allocation for ALLW and PMAR
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