BAPR vs. FFLC

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BAPR (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April) and FFLC (Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAPR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index April, while FFLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity. BAPR is passively managed, while FFLC is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BAPR returned 11.03%/yr vs 16.64%/yr for FFLC. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BAPR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for FFLC.

Performance

BAPR vs. FFLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (BAPR) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with BAPR having a 10.78% return and FFLC slightly higher at 11.06%.

BAPR

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 0.61%
• YTD: 10.78%
• 6M: 10.81%
• 1Y: 19.95%
• 3Y*: 14.74%
• 5Y*: 11.03%
• 10Y*: —

FFLC

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 1.70%
• YTD: 11.06%
• 6M: 11.02%
• 1Y: 27.64%
• 3Y*: 22.91%
• 5Y*: 16.64%
• 10Y*: —

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

BAPR vs. FFLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BAPR Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April	10.78%	8.28%	15.95%	23.16%	-7.04%	12.58%	7.00%
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	11.06%	17.67%	27.89%	25.07%	-0.04%	24.53%	19.50%

Correlation

The correlation between BAPR and FFLC is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020	0.84

The correlation between BAPR and FFLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAPR vs. FFLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAPR	FFLC
Technology	38.4%	32.5%
Financial Services	11.0%	11.6%
Communication Services	10.8%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	9.7%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.1%
Industrials	7.9%	11.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	4.6%
Energy	3.2%	4.4%
Utilities	2.1%	2.6%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.1%
Basic Materials	1.7%	1.7%

Return for Risk

BAPR vs. FFLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAPR

BAPR Risk / Return Rank: 96
BAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
BAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
BAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
BAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
BAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

FFLC

FFLC Risk / Return Rank: 64
FFLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
FFLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
FFLC Omega Ratio Rank: 64
FFLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
FFLC Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

BAPR vs. FFLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (BAPR) and Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC). 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.

	BAPR	FFLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.49	2.07	+1.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.76	2.81	+2.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.83	1.37	+0.46
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.37	2.78	+7.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	51.30	12.41	+38.89

BAPR vs. FFLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAPR Sharpe Ratio is 3.49, which is higher than the FFLC Sharpe Ratio of 2.07. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAPR and FFLC, 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

BAPR vs. FFLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAPR drawdown since its inception was -23.91%, which is greater than FFLC's maximum drawdown of -19.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAPR and FFLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAPR	FFLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.91%	-19.72%	-4.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.93%	-9.98%	+8.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.58%	-19.72%	+4.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.58%	-19.72%	+4.14%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.26%	-0.67%	+0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.58%	-2.98%	+0.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.39%	2.23%	-1.84%

Volatility

BAPR vs. FFLC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (BAPR) is 1.93%, while Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF (FFLC) has a volatility of 5.01%. This indicates that BAPR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FFLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAPR	FFLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.93%	5.01%	-3.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.85%	10.59%	-5.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.76%	13.47%	-7.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.51%	16.98%	-5.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.09%	17.68%	-4.59%

BAPR vs. FFLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAPR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than FFLC's 0.38% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAPR vs. FFLC - Dividend Comparison

BAPR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FFLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.99%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BAPR Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FFLC Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Core ETF	0.99%	1.10%	0.82%	0.57%	1.67%	1.68%	0.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAPR and FFLC in my portfolio?

BAPR and FFLC have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAPR or FFLC?

FFLC has higher volatility (5.01%) compared to BAPR (1.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAPR dropped -23.91% vs FFLC's -19.72%.

Which ETF is better, BAPR or FFLC?

On 5-year performance, FFLC leads with 16.64% vs 11.03% for BAPR. On fees, FFLC is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, BAPR has been the lower-risk option at 1.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAPR or FFLC?

Over the 5-year period, FFLC has performed better with a 16.64% return vs 11.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAPR or FFLC?

FFLC is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for BAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BAPR or FFLC?

FFLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.99%, compared with 0.00% for BAPR.

What is the main difference between BAPR and FFLC?

BAPR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while FFLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BAPR and 0.38% for FFLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.49 vs 2.07), 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.