BCHI vs. EJAN

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

BCHI (GMO Beyond China ETF) and EJAN (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January) are both exchange-traded funds - BCHI is a Emerging Markets Equities fund actively managed by GMO, while EJAN is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index. BCHI is actively managed, while EJAN is passively managed. Over the past year, BCHI returned 36.96% vs 11.50% for EJAN. Their 0.78 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BCHI charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EJAN.

Performance

BCHI vs. EJAN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCHI achieves a 20.06% return, which is significantly higher than EJAN's 6.14% return.

BCHI

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: -4.22%
• 6M: 12.35%
• YTD: 20.06%
• 1Y: 36.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 33.03%

EJAN

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 0.75%
• 6M: 3.18%
• YTD: 6.14%
• 1Y: 11.50%
• 3Y*: 6.90%
• 5Y*: 3.53%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.32%

*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)
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF	$56.39K	$51.68K	$47.34K
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	$267.44K	$193.23K	$472.80K

BCHI vs. EJAN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF	20.06%	26.33%
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	6.14%	12.22%

Correlation

The correlation between BCHI and EJAN is 0.80, 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.	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	0.78

The correlation between BCHI and EJAN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BCHI vs. EJAN — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCHI

BCHI Risk / Return Rank: 65
BCHI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
BCHI Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
BCHI Omega Ratio Rank: 70
BCHI Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
BCHI Martin Ratio Rank: 62

EJAN

EJAN Risk / Return Rank: 56
EJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
EJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
EJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 67
EJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
EJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 61

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.

BCHI vs. EJAN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN). 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.

	BCHI	EJAN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.54	1.30	+0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.12	1.87	+0.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.29	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.33	1.69	+0.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.51	7.40	+0.10

BCHI vs. EJAN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCHI Sharpe Ratio is 1.54, which is comparable to the EJAN Sharpe Ratio of 1.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCHI and EJAN, 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

BCHI vs. EJAN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCHI drawdown since its inception was -16.01%, smaller than the maximum EJAN drawdown of -22.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCHI and EJAN.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCHI	EJAN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.01%	-22.23%	+6.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.01%	-6.63%	-9.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.75%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.84%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-12.64%	-0.80%	-11.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.82%	-5.67%	+2.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.95%	1.51%	+3.44%

Volatility

BCHI vs. EJAN - Volatility Comparison

GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) has a higher volatility of 9.11% compared to Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN) at 2.75%. This indicates that BCHI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EJAN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCHI	EJAN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.11%	2.75%	+6.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	22.63%	8.21%	+14.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	24.26%	8.64%	+15.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.92%	11.15%	+11.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.92%	12.63%	+10.29%

BCHI vs. EJAN - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCHI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than EJAN's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCHI vs. EJAN - Dividend Comparison

BCHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 25.19%, while EJAN has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF	25.19%	3.67%
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCHI and EJAN in my portfolio?

BCHI and EJAN have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BCHI or EJAN?

BCHI has higher volatility (9.11%) compared to EJAN (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCHI dropped -16.01% vs EJAN's -22.23%.

Which ETF is better, BCHI or EJAN?

On 1-year performance, BCHI leads with 36.96% vs 11.50% for EJAN. On fees, BCHI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, EJAN has been the lower-risk option at 2.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCHI or EJAN?

Over the 1-year period, BCHI has performed better with a 36.96% return vs 11.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCHI or EJAN?

BCHI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EJAN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCHI or EJAN?

BCHI has the higher dividend yield at 25.19%, compared with 0.00% for EJAN.

What is the main difference between BCHI and EJAN?

BCHI is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while EJAN is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: GMO and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BCHI and 0.89% for EJAN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BCHI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.54 vs 1.30), 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.