BFEB vs. XMAR

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

BFEB (Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February) and XMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds. BFEB is passively managed, while XMAR is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BFEB returned 15.26%/yr vs 10.68%/yr for XMAR. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BFEB charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for XMAR.

Performance

BFEB vs. XMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February (BFEB) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BFEB achieves a 8.73% return, which is significantly higher than XMAR's 7.34% return.

BFEB

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 0.64%
• 6M: 7.54%
• YTD: 8.73%
• 1Y: 17.69%
• 3Y*: 15.26%
• 5Y*: 11.55%
• 10Y*: —

XMAR

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 0.42%
• 6M: 7.08%
• YTD: 7.34%
• 1Y: 11.66%
• 3Y*: 10.68%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BFEB vs. XMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BFEB Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February	8.73%	12.99%	17.58%	18.73%
XMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March	7.34%	10.30%	10.10%	10.71%

Correlation

The correlation between BFEB and XMAR is 0.84, 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	0.84
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 20, 2023	0.82

The correlation between BFEB and XMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BFEB vs. XMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BFEB

BFEB Risk / Return Rank: 81
BFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
BFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
BFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 84
BFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
BFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 85

XMAR

XMAR Risk / Return Rank: 98
XMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
XMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
XMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
XMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
XMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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. XMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February (BFEB) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR). 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.

	BFEB	XMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.13	3.85	-1.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.03	6.49	-3.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	2.02	-0.62
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.77	7.92	-5.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.71	53.63	-39.92

BFEB vs. XMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFEB Sharpe Ratio is 2.13, which is lower than the XMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFEB and XMAR, 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

BFEB vs. XMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFEB drawdown since its inception was -27.20%, which is greater than XMAR's maximum drawdown of -7.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFEB and XMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BFEB	XMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.20%	-7.29%	-19.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.41%	-1.48%	-4.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.82%	-7.29%	-6.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.27%	-0.09%	-0.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.75%	-0.30%	-2.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.29%	0.22%	+1.07%

Volatility

BFEB vs. XMAR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator S&P 500 Buffer ETF - February (BFEB) has a higher volatility of 2.16% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) at 0.83%. This indicates that BFEB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BFEB	XMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.16%	0.83%	+1.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.86%	2.66%	+4.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.34%	3.04%	+5.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.45%	5.49%	+5.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.19%	5.49%	+8.70%

BFEB vs. XMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFEB has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than XMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

BFEB vs. XMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither BFEB nor XMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BFEB and XMAR in my portfolio?

BFEB and XMAR have a correlation of 0.84, 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 XMAR?

BFEB has higher volatility (2.16%) compared to XMAR (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFEB dropped -27.20% vs XMAR's -7.29%.

Which ETF is better, BFEB or XMAR?

On 3-year performance, BFEB leads with 15.26% vs 10.68% for XMAR. On fees, BFEB is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, XMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BFEB or XMAR?

Over the 3-year period, BFEB has performed better with a 15.26% return vs 10.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BFEB or XMAR?

BFEB is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XMAR.

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

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

What is the main difference between BFEB and XMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BFEB and 0.85% for XMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.85 vs 2.13), 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.