BFRZ vs. TMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BFRZ (Innovator Equity Managed 100 Buffer ETF) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. BFRZ is actively managed, while TMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, BFRZ returned 8.04% vs 28.83% for TMAR. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BFRZ charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.

Performance

BFRZ vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Managed 100 Buffer ETF (BFRZ) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BFRZ achieves a 1.49% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 14.45% return.

BFRZ

• 1D: -0.42%
• 1M: 2.76%
• YTD: 1.49%
• 6M: 1.75%
• 1Y: 8.04%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TMAR

• 1D: -0.72%
• 1M: 2.73%
• YTD: 14.45%
• 6M: 15.92%
• 1Y: 28.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BFRZ vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BFRZ Innovator Equity Managed 100 Buffer ETF	1.49%	7.39%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	14.45%	12.83%

Correlation

The correlation between BFRZ and TMAR is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025	0.47

Return for Risk

BFRZ vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BFRZ

BFRZ Risk / Return Rank: 48
BFRZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
BFRZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
BFRZ Omega Ratio Rank: 51
BFRZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
BFRZ Martin Ratio Rank: 45

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 94
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

BFRZ vs. TMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Managed 100 Buffer ETF (BFRZ) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.

	BFRZ	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.62	3.06	-1.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.21	4.63	-2.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.77	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.59	7.95	-5.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.31	38.42	-31.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BFRZ vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BFRZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is lower than the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BFRZ and TMAR, 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

	BFRZ	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.62	3.06	-1.44
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.75	2.25	-0.50

Drawdowns

BFRZ vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BFRZ drawdown since its inception was -3.12%, smaller than the maximum TMAR drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFRZ and TMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BFRZ	TMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.12%	-9.93%	+6.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.12%	-3.64%	+0.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.42%	-0.72%	+0.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.66%	-0.66%	0.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.10%	0.75%	+0.35%

Volatility

BFRZ vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Managed 100 Buffer ETF (BFRZ) is 1.16%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that BFRZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BFRZ	TMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.16%	4.53%	-3.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.72%	8.17%	-4.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.99%	9.47%	-4.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.88%	11.42%	-6.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.88%	11.42%	-6.54%

BFRZ vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BFRZ has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

BFRZ vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

BFRZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.26%, while TMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BFRZ Innovator Equity Managed 100 Buffer ETF	0.26%	0.20%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BFRZ and TMAR in my portfolio?

BFRZ and TMAR have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BFRZ or TMAR?

TMAR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to BFRZ (1.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFRZ dropped -3.12% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

Which ETF is better, BFRZ or TMAR?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 28.83% vs 8.04% for BFRZ. On fees, BFRZ is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, BFRZ has been the lower-risk option at 1.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BFRZ or TMAR?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 28.83% return vs 8.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BFRZ or TMAR?

BFRZ is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BFRZ or TMAR?

BFRZ has the higher dividend yield at 0.26%, compared with 0.00% for TMAR.

What is the main difference between BFRZ and TMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for BFRZ and 0.95% for TMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs 1.62), 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.