BMAR vs. BUFP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March) and BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds - BMAR tracks the S&P 500 Price Return Index while BUFP tracks the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BMAR returned 20.97% vs 17.24% for BUFP. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for BUFP.

Performance

BMAR vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BMAR achieves a 8.62% return, which is significantly higher than BUFP's 6.23% return.

BMAR

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 2.82%
• YTD: 8.62%
• 6M: 9.58%
• 1Y: 20.97%
• 3Y*: 16.97%
• 5Y*: 12.18%
• 10Y*: —

BUFP

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 2.04%
• YTD: 6.23%
• 6M: 7.00%
• 1Y: 17.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BMAR vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March	8.62%	14.97%	7.42%
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	6.23%	12.92%	6.36%

Correlation

The correlation between BMAR and BUFP is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024	0.93

The correlation between BMAR and BUFP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

BMAR vs. BUFP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BMAR	BUFP
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

BMAR vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank

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

BMAR

BMAR Risk / Return Rank: 86
BMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
BMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
BMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 90
BMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
BMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 90

BUFP

BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 86
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 89
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

BMAR vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). 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.

	BMAR	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.85	2.77	+0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.13	4.12	+0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	1.58	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.73	3.93	-0.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.88	21.96	-1.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BMAR vs. BUFP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BMAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.85, which is comparable to the BUFP Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BMAR and BUFP, 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

	BMAR	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.85	2.77	+0.09
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.08	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.96	1.40	-0.44

Drawdowns

BMAR vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BMAR drawdown since its inception was -21.43%, which is greater than BUFP's maximum drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BMAR and BUFP.

Drawdown Indicators

	BMAR	BUFP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.43%	-11.98%	-9.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.64%	-4.41%	-1.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.86%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.02%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.26%	-0.22%	-0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.34%	-1.00%	-1.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.01%	0.79%	+0.22%

Volatility

BMAR vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) has a higher volatility of 1.45% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) at 0.95%. This indicates that BMAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BMAR	BUFP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.45%	0.95%	+0.50%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.88%	4.82%	+1.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.39%	6.27%	+1.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.32%	9.49%	+1.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.67%	9.49%	+4.18%

BMAR vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than BUFP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

BMAR vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison

BMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BMAR and BUFP in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, BMAR and BUFP move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, BMAR or BUFP?

BMAR has higher volatility (1.45%) compared to BUFP (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BMAR dropped -21.43% vs BUFP's -11.98%.

Which ETF is better, BMAR or BUFP?

On 1-year performance, BMAR leads with 20.97% vs 17.24% for BUFP. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BUFP has been the lower-risk option at 0.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BMAR or BUFP?

Over the 1-year period, BMAR has performed better with a 20.97% return vs 17.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BMAR or BUFP?

BUFP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for BMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BMAR or BUFP?

BUFP has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for BMAR.

What is the main difference between BMAR and BUFP?

BMAR tracks S&P 500 Price Return Index, while BUFP tracks S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BMAR and 0.50% for BUFP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.85 vs 2.77), 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.