BFEB vs. QFLR
BFEB (Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February) and QFLR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BFEB is a Options Trading fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index February Series, while QFLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Innovator. BFEB is passively managed, while QFLR is actively managed. Over the past year, BFEB returned 21.21% vs 26.98% for QFLR. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BFEB charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for QFLR.
Performance
BFEB vs. QFLR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFEB achieves a 8.25% return, which is significantly higher than QFLR's 6.90% return.
BFEB
- 1D
- -0.29%
- 1M
- 2.99%
- YTD
- 8.25%
- 6M
- 9.24%
- 1Y
- 21.21%
- 3Y*
- 16.68%
- 5Y*
- 11.70%
- 10Y*
- —
QFLR
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 3.99%
- YTD
- 6.90%
- 6M
- 5.88%
- 1Y
- 26.98%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BFEB vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
BFEB Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February | 8.25% | 12.99% | 14.97% |
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF | 6.90% | 17.27% | 16.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFEB and QFLR is 0.85, 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 | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2024 | 0.82 |
The correlation between BFEB and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.
BFEB vs. QFLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BFEB
QFLR
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
Technology
BFEB
QFLR
Financial Services
BFEB
QFLR
Communication Services
BFEB
QFLR
Consumer Cyclical
BFEB
QFLR
Healthcare
BFEB
QFLR
Industrials
BFEB
QFLR
Consumer Defensive
BFEB
QFLR
Energy
BFEB
QFLR
Utilities
BFEB
QFLR
Real Estate
BFEB
QFLR
-
Basic Materials
BFEB
QFLR
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
BFEB vs. QFLR — Risk / Return Rank
BFEB
QFLR
BFEB vs. QFLR - 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 Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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 | QFLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.50 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | 1.44 | +0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.32 | 3.56 | -0.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.95 | 15.19 | +1.76 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BFEB | QFLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.63 | 2.41 | +0.23 |
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 | 1.40 | -0.50 |
Drawdowns
BFEB vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFEB drawdown since its inception was -26.37%, which is greater than QFLR's maximum drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFEB and QFLR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFEB | QFLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -26.37% | -13.97% | -12.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.41% | -7.61% | +1.20% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.82% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.84% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.29% | -0.48% | +0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.69% | -2.50% | -0.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.25% | 1.78% | -0.53% |
Volatility
BFEB vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February (BFEB) is 1.51%, while Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) has a volatility of 2.53%. This indicates that BFEB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BFEB | QFLR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.51% | 2.53% | -1.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.31% | 8.05% | -1.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.10% | 11.28% | -3.18% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.39% | 12.62% | -1.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.19% | 12.62% | +1.57% |
BFEB vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison
BFEB has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QFLR's 0.89% expense ratio.
Dividends
BFEB vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison
Neither BFEB nor QFLR has paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
BFEB Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF | 0.00% | 0.02% | 0.03% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BFEB and QFLR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QFLR has higher volatility (2.53%) compared to BFEB (1.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFEB dropped -26.37% vs QFLR's -13.97%.
On 1-year performance, QFLR leads with 26.98% vs 21.21% for BFEB. On fees, BFEB is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, BFEB has been the lower-risk option at 1.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QFLR has performed better with a 26.98% return vs 21.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BFEB is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.
BFEB and QFLR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
BFEB is categorized as Options Trading, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BFEB and 0.89% for QFLR.
BFEB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 2.41), 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.
Find the right allocation for BFEB and QFLR
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer