CPRA vs. KMAR

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

CPRA (Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) and KMAR (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. CPRA is actively managed, while KMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, CPRA returned 8.80% vs 23.23% for KMAR. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CPRA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KMAR.

Performance

CPRA vs. KMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CPRA achieves a 4.07% return, which is significantly lower than KMAR's 11.31% return.

CPRA

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 4.07%
• 6M: 4.07%
• 1Y: 8.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

KMAR

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: 1.99%
• YTD: 11.31%
• 6M: 10.34%
• 1Y: 23.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CPRA vs. KMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CPRA Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	4.07%	6.93%
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March	11.31%	15.79%

Correlation

The correlation between CPRA and KMAR is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	0.88

The correlation between CPRA and KMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CPRA vs. KMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

CPRA

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

KMAR

KMAR Risk / Return Rank: 89
KMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
KMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
KMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 87
KMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
KMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

CPRA vs. KMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR). 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.

	CPRA	KMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.92	2.48	+1.44
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.64	3.61	+3.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.90	1.46	+0.44
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.91	4.77	+5.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	50.77	19.52	+31.25

CPRA vs. KMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CPRA Sharpe Ratio is 3.92, which is higher than the KMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CPRA and KMAR, 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

CPRA vs. KMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPRA drawdown since its inception was -1.69%, smaller than the maximum KMAR drawdown of -11.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPRA and KMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	CPRA	KMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.69%	-11.32%	+9.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.89%	-4.89%	+4.00%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	-0.30%	+0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.15%	-1.34%	+1.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.17%	1.19%	-1.02%

Volatility

CPRA vs. KMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA) is 0.65%, while Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) has a volatility of 2.99%. This indicates that CPRA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CPRA	KMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.65%	2.99%	-2.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.32%	6.72%	-5.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.25%	9.44%	-7.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.79%	12.15%	-9.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.79%	12.15%	-9.36%

CPRA vs. KMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CPRA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than KMAR's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

CPRA vs. KMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither CPRA nor KMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CPRA and KMAR in my portfolio?

CPRA and KMAR have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CPRA or KMAR?

KMAR has higher volatility (2.99%) compared to CPRA (0.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CPRA dropped -1.69% vs KMAR's -11.32%.

Which ETF is better, CPRA or KMAR?

On 1-year performance, KMAR leads with 23.23% vs 8.80% for CPRA. On fees, CPRA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CPRA has been the lower-risk option at 0.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CPRA or KMAR?

Over the 1-year period, KMAR has performed better with a 23.23% return vs 8.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CPRA or KMAR?

CPRA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CPRA or KMAR?

CPRA and KMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between CPRA and KMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CPRA and 0.79% for KMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CPRA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.92 vs 2.48), 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.