BAUG vs. PJAN

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BAUG (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August) and PJAN (Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator - BAUG tracks the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index August while PJAN tracks the Cboe S&P 500 15% Buffer Protect January Series Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BAUG returned 11.16%/yr vs 8.92%/yr for PJAN. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

BAUG vs. PJAN - 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 Power Buffer ETF - January (PJAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAUG achieves a 6.52% return, which is significantly higher than PJAN's 5.13% return.

BAUG

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 2.35%
• YTD: 6.52%
• 6M: 7.11%
• 1Y: 19.72%
• 3Y*: 17.93%
• 5Y*: 11.16%
• 10Y*: —

PJAN

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 1.94%
• YTD: 5.13%
• 6M: 5.96%
• 1Y: 14.71%
• 3Y*: 12.96%
• 5Y*: 8.92%
• 10Y*: —

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

BAUG vs. PJAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BAUG Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August	6.52%	14.81%	21.15%	20.11%	-10.30%	12.06%	12.20%	6.33%
PJAN Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January	5.13%	11.29%	13.45%	18.18%	-5.29%	8.80%	7.68%	3.16%

Correlation

The correlation between BAUG and PJAN is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2019	0.89

The correlation between BAUG and PJAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BAUG vs. PJAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAUG

BAUG Risk / Return Rank: 80
BAUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
BAUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
BAUG Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BAUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
BAUG Martin Ratio Rank: 85

PJAN

PJAN Risk / Return Rank: 79
PJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 78
PJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
PJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 87
PJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
PJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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. PJAN - 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 Power Buffer ETF - January (PJAN). 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.

	BAUG	PJAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.55	2.55	0.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.68	3.75	-0.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.54	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.50	3.19	+0.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.76	17.03	+0.72
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BAUG vs. PJAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAUG Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is comparable to the PJAN Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAUG and PJAN, 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

	BAUG	PJAN	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.55	2.55	0.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96	1.00	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.84	0.90	-0.05

Drawdowns

BAUG vs. PJAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAUG drawdown since its inception was -24.19%, which is greater than PJAN's maximum drawdown of -21.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAUG and PJAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAUG	PJAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.19%	-21.25%	-2.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.66%	-4.63%	-1.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.78%	-10.49%	-3.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.59%	-11.93%	-3.66%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-0.26%	+0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.84%	-1.73%	-1.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.11%	0.87%	+0.24%

Volatility

BAUG vs. PJAN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August (BAUG) is 1.00%, while Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - January (PJAN) has a volatility of 1.07%. This indicates that BAUG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PJAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAUG	PJAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.00%	1.07%	-0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.83%	4.71%	+1.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.79%	5.81%	+1.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.70%	8.93%	+2.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.95%	10.60%	+3.35%

BAUG vs. PJAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

BAUG vs. PJAN - Dividend Comparison

Neither BAUG nor PJAN has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAUG and PJAN in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, BAUG and PJAN 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 PJAN?

PJAN has higher volatility (1.07%) compared to BAUG (1.00%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAUG dropped -24.19% vs PJAN's -21.25%.

Which ETF is better, BAUG or PJAN?

On 5-year performance, BAUG leads with 11.16% vs 8.92% for PJAN. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAUG or PJAN?

Over the 5-year period, BAUG has performed better with a 11.16% return vs 8.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAUG or PJAN?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between BAUG and PJAN?

BAUG tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index August, while PJAN tracks Cboe S&P 500 15% Buffer Protect January Series Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PJAN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs 2.55), 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.