BALT vs. JULB

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

BALT (Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF) and JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. BALT is passively managed, while JULB is actively managed. Their 0.77 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BALT charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for JULB.

Performance

BALT vs. JULB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BALT achieves a 3.07% return, which is significantly lower than JULB's 8.79% return.

BALT

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: 0.74%
• 6M: 2.34%
• YTD: 3.07%
• 1Y: 7.13%
• 3Y*: 7.21%
• 5Y*: 6.03%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.98%

JULB

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: 1.23%
• 6M: 7.52%
• YTD: 8.79%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF	$15.46M	$17.58M	$15.99M
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	$147.19K	$170.46K	$229.15K

BALT vs. JULB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF	3.07%	2.15%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	8.79%	2.44%

Correlation

The correlation between BALT and JULB is 0.77, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2025	0.77

Return for Risk

BALT vs. JULB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BALT

BALT Risk / Return Rank: 96
BALT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
BALT Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
BALT Omega Ratio Rank: 97
BALT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
BALT Martin Ratio Rank: 96

JULB

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BALT vs. JULB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). 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.

	BALT	JULB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.17	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.85	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.69	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.21	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.86	—	—

Drawdowns

BALT vs. JULB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BALT drawdown since its inception was -4.89%, smaller than the maximum JULB drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BALT and JULB.

Drawdown Indicators

	BALT	JULB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.89%	-5.24%	+0.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.15%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.89%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-4.89%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.34%	-0.78%	+0.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.31%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BALT	JULB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.85%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.51%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.26%	6.83%	-4.57%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.31%	6.83%	-3.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.28%	6.83%	-3.55%

BALT vs. JULB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BALT has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than JULB's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

BALT vs. JULB - Dividend Comparison

Neither BALT nor JULB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BALT and JULB in my portfolio?

BALT and JULB have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BALT or JULB?

On fees, JULB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BALT or JULB?

JULB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for BALT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BALT or JULB?

BALT and JULB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BALT and JULB?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Aptus. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for BALT and 0.25% for JULB.