PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BJUL vs. QB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BJUL vs. QB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (BJUL) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BJUL achieves a 9.42% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 15.61% return.


BJUL

1D
1.10%
1M
2.63%
6M
8.59%
YTD
9.42%
1Y
16.08%
3Y*
16.08%
5Y*
11.74%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
10.16%

QB

1D
0.85%
1M
4.09%
6M
15.00%
YTD
15.61%
1Y
22.04%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
20.28%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$791.36K$3.32M$1.95M
$54.67K$35.27K$152.35K

BJUL vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BJUL and QB is 0.70, 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.

0.70

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025

0.70

The correlation between BJUL and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

BJUL vs. QB - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BJUL
QB

Technology

37.9%
49.9%

Financial Services

11.7%
0.2%

Communication Services

10.0%
16.4%

Consumer Cyclical

9.6%
12.5%

Healthcare

9.1%
5.3%

Industrials

8.4%
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

4.6%
8.6%

Energy

3.0%
0.6%

Utilities

2.3%
1.6%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.1%

Basic Materials

1.7%
1.3%

Technology

BJUL
37.9%
QB
49.9%

Financial Services

BJUL
11.7%
QB
0.2%

Communication Services

BJUL
10.0%
QB
16.4%

Consumer Cyclical

BJUL
9.6%
QB
12.5%

Healthcare

BJUL
9.1%
QB
5.3%

Industrials

BJUL
8.4%
QB
3.7%

Consumer Defensive

BJUL
4.6%
QB
8.6%

Energy

BJUL
3.0%
QB
0.6%

Utilities

BJUL
2.3%
QB
1.6%

Real Estate

BJUL
1.9%
QB
0.1%

Basic Materials

BJUL
1.7%
QB
1.3%

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

BJUL vs. QB — Risk / Return Rank

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

BJUL
BJUL Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
BJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
BJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
BJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
BJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

QB
QB Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
QB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
QB Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
QB Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
QB Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BJUL vs. QB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (BJUL) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). 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.


BJULQBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.88

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.40

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.73

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.99

6.37

-3.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.18

30.57

-15.39

BJUL vs. QB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is comparable to the QB Sharpe Ratio of 3.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BJUL and QB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

BJUL vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BJUL drawdown since its inception was -24.03%, which is greater than QB's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BJUL and QB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BJULQBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-24.03%

-3.47%

-20.56%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.40%

-3.47%

-1.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.45%

-0.41%

-2.04%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.06%

0.72%

+0.34%

Volatility

BJUL vs. QB - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (BJUL) has a higher volatility of 2.83% compared to ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) at 2.40%. This indicates that BJUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BJULQBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.83%

2.40%

+0.43%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.95%

6.11%

-0.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.49%

7.29%

+0.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.65%

7.05%

+4.60%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.54%

7.05%

+6.49%

BJUL vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BJUL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.


Dividends

BJUL vs. QB - Dividend Comparison

BJUL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.75%.


Frequently Asked Questions


BJUL and QB have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BJUL has higher volatility (2.83%) compared to QB (2.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BJUL dropped -24.03% vs QB's -3.47%.

On 1-year performance, QB leads with 22.04% vs 16.08% for BJUL. On fees, QB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, QB has been the lower-risk option at 2.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QB has performed better with a 22.04% return vs 16.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for BJUL.

QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.75%, compared with 0.00% for BJUL.

BJUL tracks S&P 500, while QB tracks Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BJUL and 0.58% for QB.

QB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.05 vs 2.17), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BJUL and QB

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