BAUG vs. BJUL

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BAUG (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August) and BJUL (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator - BAUG tracks the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index August while BJUL tracks the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BAUG returned 11.12%/yr vs 11.51%/yr for BJUL. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

BAUG vs. BJUL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August (BAUG) and Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (BJUL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with BAUG having a 6.74% return and BJUL slightly lower at 6.64%.

BAUG

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.78%
• YTD: 6.74%
• 6M: 6.65%
• 1Y: 19.96%
• 3Y*: 17.58%
• 5Y*: 11.12%
• 10Y*: —

BJUL

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.86%
• YTD: 6.64%
• 6M: 6.52%
• 1Y: 19.49%
• 3Y*: 16.23%
• 5Y*: 11.51%
• 10Y*: —

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

BAUG vs. BJUL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BAUG Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August	6.74%	14.81%	21.15%	20.11%	-10.30%	12.06%	12.20%	5.94%
BJUL Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July	6.64%	13.93%	18.41%	21.73%	-7.38%	10.77%	9.05%	5.70%

Correlation

The correlation between BAUG and BJUL is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.97
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.97
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2019	0.95

The correlation between BAUG and BJUL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAUG vs. BJUL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAUG	BJUL
Technology	38.4%	38.4%
Financial Services	11.0%	11.0%
Communication Services	10.8%	10.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	10.0%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	7.9%	7.9%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	4.6%
Energy	3.2%	3.2%
Utilities	2.1%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.8%
Basic Materials	1.7%	1.7%

Return for Risk

BAUG vs. BJUL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAUG

BAUG Risk / Return Rank: 84
BAUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BAUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
BAUG Omega Ratio Rank: 87
BAUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
BAUG Martin Ratio Rank: 87

BJUL

BJUL Risk / Return Rank: 85
BJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
BJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
BJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 89
BJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
BJUL 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.

BAUG vs. BJUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August (BAUG) and Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (BJUL). 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.

	BAUG	BJUL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.60	2.68	-0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.75	3.88	-0.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.54	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.54	3.62	-0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.94	18.92	-0.99

BAUG vs. BJUL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAUG Sharpe Ratio is 2.60, which is comparable to the BJUL Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAUG and BJUL, 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

BAUG vs. BJUL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAUG drawdown since its inception was -24.19%, roughly equal to the maximum BJUL drawdown of -24.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAUG and BJUL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAUG	BJUL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.19%	-24.03%	-0.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.66%	-5.40%	-0.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.78%	-14.06%	+0.28%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.59%	-14.06%	-1.53%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.16%	0.00%	-0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.83%	-2.48%	-0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.12%	1.03%	+0.09%

Volatility

BAUG vs. BJUL - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August (BAUG) has a higher volatility of 1.70% compared to Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (BJUL) at 1.11%. This indicates that BAUG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BJUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAUG	BJUL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.70%	1.11%	+0.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.95%	5.51%	+0.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.72%	7.31%	+0.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.73%	11.62%	+0.11%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.91%	13.60%	+0.31%

BAUG vs. BJUL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BAUG and BJUL have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

BAUG vs. BJUL - Dividend Comparison

Neither BAUG nor BJUL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAUG and BJUL in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.97, BAUG and BJUL move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, BAUG or BJUL?

BAUG has higher volatility (1.70%) compared to BJUL (1.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAUG dropped -24.19% vs BJUL's -24.03%.

Which ETF is better, BAUG or BJUL?

On 5-year performance, BJUL leads with 11.51% vs 11.12% for BAUG. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, BJUL has been the lower-risk option at 1.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAUG or BJUL?

Over the 5-year period, BJUL has performed better with a 11.51% return vs 11.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAUG or BJUL?

BAUG and BJUL have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BAUG or BJUL?

BAUG and BJUL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BAUG and BJUL?

BAUG tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index August, while BJUL tracks S&P 500.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BJUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 vs 2.60), 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.