BAUG vs. PMAR

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

BAUG (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August) and PMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator - BAUG tracks the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index August while PMAR tracks the Cboe S&P 500 15% Buffer Protect March Series Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BAUG returned 11.37%/yr vs 9.38%/yr for PMAR. Their correlation of 0.88 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

BAUG vs. PMAR - 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 - March (PMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAUG achieves a 8.35% return, which is significantly higher than PMAR's 6.96% return.

BAUG

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 1.12%
• 6M: 7.36%
• YTD: 8.35%
• 1Y: 16.10%
• 3Y*: 16.16%
• 5Y*: 11.37%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.65%

PMAR

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 0.69%
• 6M: 6.19%
• YTD: 6.96%
• 1Y: 13.15%
• 3Y*: 12.05%
• 5Y*: 9.38%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.84%

*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)
BAUG Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August	$705.00K	$399.85K	$286.26K
PMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March	$534.56K	$535.71K	$824.90K

BAUG vs. PMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BAUG Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August	8.35%	14.81%	21.15%	20.11%	-10.30%	12.06%	19.09%
PMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March	6.96%	11.82%	12.83%	15.95%	-2.65%	10.96%	8.01%

Correlation

The correlation between BAUG and PMAR is 0.93, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 2, 2020	0.88

The correlation between BAUG and PMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAUG vs. PMAR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAUG	PMAR
Technology	37.9%	37.9%
Financial Services	11.7%	11.7%
Communication Services	10.0%	10.0%
Consumer Cyclical	9.6%	9.6%
Healthcare	9.1%	9.1%
Industrials	8.4%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	4.6%
Energy	3.0%	3.0%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.7%	1.7%

Return for Risk

BAUG vs. PMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAUG

BAUG Risk / Return Rank: 84
BAUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BAUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
BAUG Omega Ratio Rank: 87
BAUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
BAUG Martin Ratio Rank: 89

PMAR

PMAR Risk / Return Rank: 90
PMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
PMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
PMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
PMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
PMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

BAUG vs. PMAR - 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 - March (PMAR). 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	PMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.97	2.28	-0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.86	3.37	-0.51
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.49	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.66	3.03	-0.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.47	17.29	-3.82

BAUG vs. PMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAUG Sharpe Ratio is 1.97, which is comparable to the PMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAUG and PMAR, 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. PMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAUG drawdown since its inception was -24.19%, which is greater than PMAR's maximum drawdown of -17.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAUG and PMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAUG	PMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.19%	-17.18%	-7.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.66%	-4.11%	-1.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.78%	-9.32%	-4.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.59%	-10.84%	-4.75%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.09%	+0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.79%	-1.53%	-1.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.12%	0.72%	+0.40%

Volatility

BAUG vs. PMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August (BAUG) is 1.30%, while Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR) has a volatility of 1.51%. This indicates that BAUG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAUG	PMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.30%	1.51%	-0.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.92%	4.58%	+1.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.66%	5.46%	+2.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.75%	8.20%	+3.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.82%	10.63%	+3.19%

BAUG vs. PMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

BAUG vs. PMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither BAUG nor PMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAUG and PMAR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, BAUG and PMAR 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 PMAR?

PMAR has higher volatility (1.51%) compared to BAUG (1.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAUG dropped -24.19% vs PMAR's -17.18%.

Which ETF is better, BAUG or PMAR?

On 5-year performance, BAUG leads with 11.37% vs 9.38% for PMAR. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, BAUG has been the lower-risk option at 1.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAUG or PMAR?

Over the 5-year period, BAUG has performed better with a 11.37% return vs 9.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAUG or PMAR?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between BAUG and PMAR?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 1.97), 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.