BMAR vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BMAR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500 Price Return Index, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. BMAR is passively managed, while CAOS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BMAR returned 16.37%/yr vs 3.94%/yr for CAOS. At a 0.10 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

BMAR vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BMAR achieves a 8.30% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.71% return.

BMAR

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 8.30%
• 6M: 8.30%
• 1Y: 20.21%
• 3Y*: 16.37%
• 5Y*: 11.97%
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: -0.12%
• YTD: 0.71%
• 6M: 0.61%
• 1Y: 1.62%
• 3Y*: 3.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BMAR vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March	8.30%	14.97%	16.49%	15.55%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.71%	2.55%	5.33%	7.43%

Correlation

The correlation between BMAR and CAOS is -0.36, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.36
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 6, 2023	0.10

The correlation between BMAR and CAOS shifts across timeframes, from -0.36 (1 year) to 0.10 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BMAR vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BMAR

BMAR Risk / Return Rank: 85
BMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
BMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
BMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 89
BMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
BMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 90

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 36
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	BMAR	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.68	1.08	+1.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	1.72	+2.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.22	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.60	2.15	+1.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.65	5.18	+14.47

BMAR vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BMAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.68, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BMAR and CAOS, 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

BMAR vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BMAR drawdown since its inception was -21.43%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BMAR and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BMAR	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.43%	-3.89%	-17.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.64%	-0.76%	-4.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.86%	-3.60%	-9.26%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.02%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.56%	-1.18%	+0.62%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.33%	-0.92%	-1.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.03%	0.32%	+0.71%

Volatility

BMAR vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) has a higher volatility of 2.36% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.32%. This indicates that BMAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BMAR	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.36%	0.32%	+2.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.23%	1.05%	+5.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.58%	1.50%	+6.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.35%	4.23%	+7.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.65%	4.23%	+9.42%

BMAR vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

BMAR vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

Neither BMAR nor CAOS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BMAR and CAOS in my portfolio?

BMAR and CAOS have a correlation of -0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BMAR or CAOS?

BMAR has higher volatility (2.36%) compared to CAOS (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BMAR dropped -21.43% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, BMAR or CAOS?

On 3-year performance, BMAR leads with 16.37% vs 3.94% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BMAR or CAOS?

Over the 3-year period, BMAR has performed better with a 16.37% return vs 3.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BMAR or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for BMAR.

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

BMAR and CAOS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BMAR and CAOS?

BMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BMAR and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 vs 1.08), 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.