BMAR vs. QB
BMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March) and QB (ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds - BMAR tracks the S&P 500 Price Return Index while QB tracks the Nasdaq-100. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BMAR returned 17.12% vs 18.28% for QB. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for QB.
Performance
BMAR vs. QB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BMAR achieves a 8.91% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 12.15% return.
BMAR
- 1D
- -0.41%
- 1M
- 1.08%
- 6M
- 7.90%
- YTD
- 8.91%
- 1Y
- 17.12%
- 3Y*
- 15.62%
- 5Y*
- 11.80%
- 10Y*
- —
QB
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- 3.02%
- 6M
- 10.85%
- YTD
- 12.15%
- 1Y
- 18.28%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BMAR vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March | 8.91% | 9.51% |
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 12.15% | 6.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between BMAR and QB is 0.77, 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 | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025 | 0.77 |
The correlation between BMAR and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.77 - a consistent structural relationship.
BMAR vs. QB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BMAR
QB
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
BMAR
QB
Financial Services
BMAR
QB
Communication Services
BMAR
QB
Consumer Cyclical
BMAR
QB
Healthcare
BMAR
QB
Industrials
BMAR
QB
Consumer Defensive
BMAR
QB
Energy
BMAR
QB
Utilities
BMAR
QB
Real Estate
BMAR
QB
Basic Materials
BMAR
QB
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
BMAR vs. QB — Risk / Return Rank
BMAR
QB
BMAR vs. QB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) 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.
| BMAR | QB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 1.62 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.05 | 5.28 | -2.24 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.32 | 25.48 | -9.16 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BMAR vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BMAR drawdown since its inception was -21.43%, which is greater than QB's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BMAR and QB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BMAR | QB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.43% | -3.47% | -17.96% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.64% | -3.47% | -2.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.86% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.02% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.41% | -0.31% | -0.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.31% | -0.42% | -1.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.05% | 0.72% | +0.33% |
Volatility
BMAR vs. QB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) is 2.64%, while ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) has a volatility of 3.05%. This indicates that BMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BMAR | QB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.64% | 3.05% | -0.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.51% | 5.83% | +0.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.73% | 7.03% | +0.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.38% | 6.93% | +4.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.62% | 6.93% | +6.69% |
BMAR vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison
BMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
BMAR vs. QB - Dividend Comparison
BMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
BMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% |
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 0.78% | 0.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BMAR and QB have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QB has higher volatility (3.05%) compared to BMAR (2.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BMAR dropped -21.43% vs QB's -3.47%.
On 1-year performance, QB leads with 18.28% vs 17.12% for BMAR. On fees, QB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, BMAR has been the lower-risk option at 2.64%. 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 18.28% return vs 17.12%. 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 BMAR.
QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.00% for BMAR.
BMAR tracks S&P 500 Price Return Index, while QB tracks Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for BMAR and 0.58% for QB.
QB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 2.23), 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 BMAR 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