BFEB vs. BALT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BFEB (Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February) and BALT (Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BFEB is a Options Trading fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index February Series, while BALT is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BFEB returned 16.68%/yr vs 7.27%/yr for BALT. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BFEB charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for BALT.

Performance

BFEB vs. BALT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February (BFEB) and Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BFEB achieves a 8.25% return, which is significantly higher than BALT's 1.91% return.

BFEB

• 1D: -0.29%
• 1M: 2.99%
• YTD: 8.25%
• 6M: 9.24%
• 1Y: 21.21%
• 3Y*: 16.68%
• 5Y*: 11.70%
• 10Y*: —

BALT

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.53%
• YTD: 1.91%
• 6M: 2.81%
• 1Y: 6.95%
• 3Y*: 7.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BFEB vs. BALT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BFEB Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February	8.25%	12.99%	17.58%	22.35%	-6.76%	4.76%
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF	1.91%	6.65%	9.98%	7.45%	2.54%	0.82%

Correlation

The correlation between BFEB and BALT is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.76
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2021	0.77

The correlation between BFEB and BALT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.

BFEB vs. BALT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BFEB	BALT
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

BFEB vs. BALT — Risk / Return Rank

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

BFEB

BFEB Risk / Return Rank: 80
BFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
BFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
BFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 84
BFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
BFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 83

BALT

BALT Risk / Return Rank: 92
BALT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
BALT Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
BALT Omega Ratio Rank: 93
BALT Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
BALT Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

BFEB vs. BALT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February (BFEB) and Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT). 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.

	BFEB	BALT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.63	3.19	-0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.76	4.88	-1.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.67	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.32	6.05	-2.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.95	22.58	-5.62
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BFEB vs. BALT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFEB Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is comparable to the BALT Sharpe Ratio of 3.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFEB and BALT, 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

	BFEB	BALT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.63	3.19	-0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.03	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.90	1.80	-0.90

Drawdowns

BFEB vs. BALT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFEB drawdown since its inception was -26.37%, which is greater than BALT's maximum drawdown of -4.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFEB and BALT.

Drawdown Indicators

	BFEB	BALT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.37%	-4.89%	-21.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.41%	-1.15%	-5.26%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.82%	-4.89%	-8.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.29%	-0.06%	-0.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.69%	-0.34%	-2.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.25%	0.31%	+0.94%

Volatility

BFEB vs. BALT - Volatility Comparison

Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February (BFEB) has a higher volatility of 1.51% compared to Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT) at 0.37%. This indicates that BFEB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BALT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BFEB	BALT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.51%	0.37%	+1.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.31%	1.56%	+4.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.10%	2.19%	+5.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.39%	3.32%	+8.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.19%	3.32%	+10.87%

BFEB vs. BALT - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFEB has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than BALT's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

BFEB vs. BALT - Dividend Comparison

Neither BFEB nor BALT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BFEB and BALT in my portfolio?

BFEB and BALT have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BFEB or BALT?

BFEB has higher volatility (1.51%) compared to BALT (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFEB dropped -26.37% vs BALT's -4.89%.

Which ETF is better, BFEB or BALT?

On 3-year performance, BFEB leads with 16.68% vs 7.27% for BALT. On fees, BALT is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, BALT has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BFEB or BALT?

Over the 3-year period, BFEB has performed better with a 16.68% return vs 7.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BFEB or BALT?

BALT is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for BFEB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BFEB or BALT?

BFEB and BALT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BFEB and BALT?

BFEB is categorized as Options Trading, while BALT is Defined Outcome. BFEB tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index February Series, while BALT tracks S&P 500. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BFEB and 0.69% for BALT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BALT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 2.63), 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.