BALT vs. KMAR
BALT (Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF) and KMAR (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator - BALT tracks the S&P 500 while KMAR tracks the iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) Price Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BALT returned 7.13% vs 24.41% for KMAR. Their 0.66 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BALT charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KMAR.
Performance
BALT vs. KMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BALT achieves a 3.07% return, which is significantly lower than KMAR's 12.74% 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%
KMAR
- 1D
- 0.84%
- 1M
- 0.78%
- 6M
- 9.45%
- YTD
- 12.74%
- 1Y
- 24.41%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 17.47%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $15.46M | $17.58M | $15.99M | |
| $120.12K | $77.14K | $163.43K |
BALT vs. KMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF | 3.07% | 5.58% |
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March | 12.74% | 11.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between BALT and KMAR is 0.59, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.59 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2025 | 0.66 |
The correlation between BALT and KMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
BALT vs. KMAR — Risk / Return Rank
BALT
KMAR
BALT vs. KMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR). 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 | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.49 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.91 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.69 | 1.52 | +0.17 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.21 | 5.01 | +1.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 22.86 | 21.18 | +1.68 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BALT vs. KMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BALT drawdown since its inception was -4.89%, smaller than the maximum KMAR drawdown of -11.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BALT and KMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BALT | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -4.89% | -11.32% | +6.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.15% | -4.89% | +3.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.89% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -4.89% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.34% | -1.26% | +0.92% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.31% | 1.16% | -0.85% |
Volatility
BALT vs. KMAR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT) is 0.85%, while Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) has a volatility of 1.82%. This indicates that BALT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BALT | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.85% | 1.82% | -0.97% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.51% | 6.80% | -5.29% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.26% | 9.17% | -6.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.31% | 11.78% | -8.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.28% | 11.78% | -8.50% |
BALT vs. KMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
BALT has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than KMAR's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
BALT vs. KMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither BALT nor KMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
BALT and KMAR have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KMAR has higher volatility (1.82%) compared to BALT (0.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BALT dropped -4.89% vs KMAR's -11.32%.
On 1-year performance, KMAR leads with 24.41% vs 7.13% for BALT. On fees, BALT is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, BALT has been the lower-risk option at 0.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, KMAR has performed better with a 24.41% return vs 7.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BALT is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KMAR.
BALT and KMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
BALT tracks S&P 500, while KMAR tracks iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) Price Return. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for BALT and 0.79% for KMAR.
BALT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs 2.68), 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 BALT and KMAR
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