BNKU vs. QTAP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BNKU (MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs) and QTAP (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April) are both Leveraged Equities funds. BNKU is passively managed, while QTAP is actively managed. Over the past year, BNKU returned 85.57% vs 25.59% for QTAP. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BNKU charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QTAP.

Performance

BNKU vs. QTAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BNKU achieves a -1.60% return, which is significantly lower than QTAP's 14.67% return.

BNKU

• 1D: -3.18%
• 1M: 6.20%
• YTD: -1.60%
• 6M: 10.64%
• 1Y: 85.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QTAP

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 2.89%
• YTD: 14.67%
• 6M: 15.56%
• 1Y: 25.59%
• 3Y*: 21.18%
• 5Y*: 13.78%
• 10Y*: —

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

BNKU vs. QTAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BNKU MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs	-1.60%	46.04%
QTAP Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April	14.67%	15.91%

Correlation

The correlation between BNKU and QTAP is 0.50, 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	0.50
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2025	0.60

The correlation between BNKU and QTAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

BNKU vs. QTAP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BNKU	QTAP
Financial Services	100.0%	0.2%
Basic Materials	-	1.3%
Communication Services	-	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.5%
Consumer Defensive	-	8.7%
Energy	-	0.7%
Healthcare	-	5.1%
Industrials	-	3.3%
Real Estate	-	0.1%
Technology	-	50.7%
Utilities	-	1.6%

Return for Risk

BNKU vs. QTAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

BNKU

BNKU Risk / Return Rank: 39
BNKU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 43
BNKU Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
BNKU Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BNKU Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BNKU Martin Ratio Rank: 36

QTAP

QTAP Risk / Return Rank: 98
QTAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
QTAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
QTAP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
QTAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
QTAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

BNKU vs. QTAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU) and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP). 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.

	BNKU	QTAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	4.62	-3.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	8.50	-6.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	2.23	-0.97
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.10	15.20	-13.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.55	80.04	-74.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BNKU vs. QTAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BNKU Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is lower than the QTAP Sharpe Ratio of 4.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BNKU and QTAP, 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

	BNKU	QTAP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.52	4.62	-3.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.73	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.45	0.75	-0.30

Drawdowns

BNKU vs. QTAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BNKU drawdown since its inception was -58.03%, which is greater than QTAP's maximum drawdown of -29.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BNKU and QTAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	BNKU	QTAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.03%	-29.44%	-28.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-40.97%	-1.69%	-39.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.03%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.44%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.59%	-0.10%	-16.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.56%	-5.04%	-11.52%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.48%	0.32%	+15.16%

Volatility

BNKU vs. QTAP - Volatility Comparison

MicroSectors U.S. Big Banks Index 3X Leveraged ETNs (BNKU) has a higher volatility of 13.86% compared to Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) at 1.33%. This indicates that BNKU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QTAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BNKU	QTAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.86%	1.33%	+12.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.02%	3.97%	+41.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	56.70%	5.56%	+51.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	72.86%	18.89%	+53.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	72.86%	18.77%	+54.09%

BNKU vs. QTAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BNKU has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than QTAP's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

BNKU vs. QTAP - Dividend Comparison

Neither BNKU nor QTAP has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BNKU and QTAP in my portfolio?

BNKU and QTAP have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BNKU or QTAP?

BNKU has higher volatility (13.86%) compared to QTAP (1.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BNKU dropped -58.03% vs QTAP's -29.44%.

Which ETF is better, BNKU or QTAP?

On 1-year performance, BNKU leads with 85.57% vs 25.59% for QTAP. On fees, QTAP is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTAP has been the lower-risk option at 1.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BNKU or QTAP?

Over the 1-year period, BNKU has performed better with a 85.57% return vs 25.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BNKU or QTAP?

QTAP is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BNKU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BNKU or QTAP?

BNKU and QTAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BNKU and QTAP?

They also come from different issuers: Bank of Montreal and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BNKU and 0.79% for QTAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.62 vs 1.52), 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.