APRH vs. BUFQ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

APRH (Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - April) and BUFQ (FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - APRH is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator, while BUFQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ 100 Index - USD. APRH is actively managed, while BUFQ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, APRH returned 7.42%/yr vs 16.99%/yr for BUFQ. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. APRH charges 0.79%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for BUFQ.

Performance

APRH vs. BUFQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - April (APRH) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, APRH achieves a 4.49% return, which is significantly lower than BUFQ's 9.53% return.

APRH

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 1.07%
• YTD: 4.49%
• 6M: 4.02%
• 1Y: 7.82%
• 3Y*: 7.42%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFQ

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 2.68%
• YTD: 9.53%
• 6M: 10.14%
• 1Y: 21.61%
• 3Y*: 16.99%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

APRH vs. BUFQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
APRH Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - April	4.49%	5.84%	6.91%	6.96%
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF	9.53%	14.03%	16.41%	17.50%

Correlation

The correlation between APRH and BUFQ is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2023	0.64

The correlation between APRH and BUFQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

APRH vs. BUFQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	APRH	BUFQ
Technology	33.6%	54.2%
Financial Services	12.4%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.5%	15.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	12.2%
Healthcare	9.5%	4.2%
Industrials	8.5%	2.8%
Consumer Defensive	5.3%	7.6%
Energy	4.0%	0.6%
Utilities	2.5%	1.4%
Real Estate	2.0%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.9%	1.2%

Return for Risk

APRH vs. BUFQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

APRH

APRH Risk / Return Rank: 93
APRH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
APRH Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
APRH Omega Ratio Rank: 97
APRH Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
APRH Martin Ratio Rank: 91

BUFQ

BUFQ Risk / Return Rank: 84
BUFQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BUFQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
BUFQ Omega Ratio Rank: 85
BUFQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
BUFQ Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

APRH vs. BUFQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - April (APRH) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). 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.

	APRH	BUFQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.18	2.62	+0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.75	3.88	+0.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.90	1.53	+0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.48	4.03	+2.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.02	20.34	+1.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

APRH vs. BUFQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current APRH Sharpe Ratio is 3.18, which is comparable to the BUFQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of APRH and BUFQ, 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

	APRH	BUFQ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.18	2.62	+0.56
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.70	1.42	+0.27

Drawdowns

APRH vs. BUFQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum APRH drawdown since its inception was -5.87%, smaller than the maximum BUFQ drawdown of -15.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for APRH and BUFQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	APRH	BUFQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.87%	-15.74%	+9.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.21%	-5.39%	+4.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.87%	-15.74%	+9.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.08%	-0.04%	-0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.21%	-2.31%	+2.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.36%	1.06%	-0.70%

Volatility

APRH vs. BUFQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - April (APRH) is 0.55%, while FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) has a volatility of 1.17%. This indicates that APRH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	APRH	BUFQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.55%	1.17%	-0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.98%	6.42%	-4.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.47%	8.31%	-5.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.56%	13.35%	-8.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.56%	13.35%	-8.79%

APRH vs. BUFQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

APRH has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFQ's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

APRH vs. BUFQ - Dividend Comparison

APRH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.35%, while BUFQ has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
APRH Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - April	5.35%	5.49%	6.87%	5.90%
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both APRH and BUFQ in my portfolio?

APRH and BUFQ have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, APRH or BUFQ?

BUFQ has higher volatility (1.17%) compared to APRH (0.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, APRH dropped -5.87% vs BUFQ's -15.74%.

Which ETF is better, APRH or BUFQ?

On 3-year performance, BUFQ leads with 16.99% vs 7.42% for APRH. On fees, APRH is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, APRH has been the lower-risk option at 0.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, APRH or BUFQ?

Over the 3-year period, BUFQ has performed better with a 16.99% return vs 7.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, APRH or BUFQ?

APRH is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, APRH or BUFQ?

APRH has the higher dividend yield at 5.35%, compared with 0.00% for BUFQ.

What is the main difference between APRH and BUFQ?

APRH is categorized as Options Trading, while BUFQ is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for APRH and 1.10% for BUFQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

APRH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.18 vs 2.62), 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.