BJUN vs. APXM
BJUN (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June) and APXM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. BJUN is passively managed, while APXM is actively managed. Over the past year, BJUN returned 14.41% vs 5.49% for APXM. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BJUN charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for APXM.
Performance
BJUN vs. APXM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BJUN achieves a 4.45% return, which is significantly higher than APXM's 2.11% return.
BJUN
- 1D
- -0.51%
- 1M
- 0.57%
- YTD
- 4.45%
- 6M
- 5.26%
- 1Y
- 14.41%
- 3Y*
- 14.50%
- 5Y*
- 8.67%
- 10Y*
- —
APXM
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.79%
- YTD
- 2.11%
- 6M
- 2.59%
- 1Y
- 5.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BJUN vs. APXM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BJUN Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June | 4.45% | 22.62% |
APXM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April | 2.11% | 5.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between BJUN and APXM is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2025 | 0.69 |
The correlation between BJUN and APXM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
BJUN vs. APXM — Risk / Return Rank
BJUN
APXM
BJUN vs. APXM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (BJUN) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM). 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.
| BJUN | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -7.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | 2.60 | -1.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.32 | 20.36 | -17.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.84 | 110.99 | -92.14 |
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
| BJUN | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.27 | 5.47 | -3.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.80 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.74 | 5.70 | -4.96 |
Drawdowns
BJUN vs. APXM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BJUN drawdown since its inception was -22.71%, which is greater than APXM's maximum drawdown of -0.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BJUN and APXM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BJUN | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.71% | -0.40% | -22.31% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.36% | -0.27% | -4.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.69% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.69% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.51% | -0.06% | -0.45% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.85% | -0.03% | -2.82% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.77% | 0.05% | +0.72% |
Volatility
BJUN vs. APXM - Volatility Comparison
Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - June (BJUN) has a higher volatility of 0.63% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM) at 0.42%. This indicates that BJUN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APXM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BJUN | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.63% | 0.42% | +0.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.67% | 0.78% | +3.89% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.40% | 1.01% | +5.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.88% | 1.20% | +9.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.21% | 1.20% | +12.01% |
BJUN vs. APXM - Expense Ratio Comparison
BJUN has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than APXM's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
BJUN vs. APXM - Dividend Comparison
Neither BJUN nor APXM has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
BJUN and APXM have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BJUN has higher volatility (0.63%) compared to APXM (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BJUN dropped -22.71% vs APXM's -0.40%.
On 1-year performance, BJUN leads with 14.41% vs 5.49% for APXM. On fees, BJUN is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, APXM has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BJUN has performed better with a 14.41% return vs 5.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BJUN is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for APXM.
BJUN and APXM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BJUN and 0.85% for APXM.
APXM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.47 vs 2.27), 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 BJUN and APXM
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