BUFB vs. ZAPR

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

BUFB (Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF) and ZAPR (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. BUFB is passively managed, while ZAPR is actively managed. Over the past year, BUFB returned 16.02% vs 6.28% for ZAPR. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BUFB charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for ZAPR.

Performance

BUFB vs. ZAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF (BUFB) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFB achieves a 5.97% return, which is significantly higher than ZAPR's 3.01% return.

BUFB

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: -0.43%
• YTD: 5.97%
• 6M: 5.58%
• 1Y: 16.02%
• 3Y*: 14.83%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZAPR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.06%
• YTD: 3.01%
• 6M: 2.99%
• 1Y: 6.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFB vs. ZAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BUFB Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF	5.97%	16.60%
ZAPR Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April	3.01%	5.31%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFB and ZAPR is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	0.64

The correlation between BUFB and ZAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BUFB vs. ZAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFB

BUFB Risk / Return Rank: 78
BUFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
BUFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BUFB Omega Ratio Rank: 80
BUFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
BUFB Martin Ratio Rank: 86

ZAPR

ZAPR Risk / Return Rank: 98
ZAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
ZAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ZAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ZAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
ZAPR 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.

BUFB vs. ZAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF (BUFB) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR). 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.

	BUFB	ZAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	4.36	-2.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	7.72	-4.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.41	2.10	-0.68
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.15	15.70	-12.56
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.22	69.28	-53.06

BUFB vs. ZAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFB Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is lower than the ZAPR Sharpe Ratio of 4.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFB and ZAPR, 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

BUFB vs. ZAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFB drawdown since its inception was -14.88%, which is greater than ZAPR's maximum drawdown of -1.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFB and ZAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFB	ZAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.88%	-1.72%	-13.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.12%	-0.40%	-4.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.75%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.32%	-0.30%	-1.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.85%	-0.09%	-2.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.99%	0.09%	+0.90%

Volatility

BUFB vs. ZAPR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Laddered Allocation Buffer ETF (BUFB) has a higher volatility of 2.53% compared to Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR) at 0.52%. This indicates that BUFB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFB	ZAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.53%	0.52%	+2.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.17%	1.09%	+5.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.67%	1.46%	+6.21%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.98%	2.49%	+9.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.98%	2.49%	+9.49%

BUFB vs. ZAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFB has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than ZAPR's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFB vs. ZAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUFB nor ZAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFB and ZAPR in my portfolio?

BUFB and ZAPR have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUFB or ZAPR?

BUFB has higher volatility (2.53%) compared to ZAPR (0.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFB dropped -14.88% vs ZAPR's -1.72%.

Which ETF is better, BUFB or ZAPR?

On 1-year performance, BUFB leads with 16.02% vs 6.28% for ZAPR. On fees, ZAPR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, ZAPR has been the lower-risk option at 0.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFB or ZAPR?

Over the 1-year period, BUFB has performed better with a 16.02% return vs 6.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFB or ZAPR?

ZAPR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for BUFB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFB or ZAPR?

BUFB and ZAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BUFB and ZAPR?

Their fees differ too: 0.89% for BUFB and 0.79% for ZAPR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.36 vs 2.11), 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.