PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
DDFL vs. EAPR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

DDFL vs. EAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Dual Directional 15 Buffer ETF - July (DDFL) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DDFL achieves a 3.63% return, which is significantly lower than EAPR's 9.17% return.


DDFL

1D
0.24%
1M
0.52%
6M
3.32%
YTD
3.63%
1Y
8.10%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
6.07%

EAPR

1D
0.61%
1M
0.32%
6M
8.21%
YTD
9.17%
1Y
15.75%
3Y*
8.62%
5Y*
5.46%
10Y*
ALL TIME*
4.84%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$2.70M$3.47M$2.07M
$354.30K$262.28K$462.78K

DDFL vs. EAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between DDFL and EAPR is 0.47, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2025

0.45

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

DDFL vs. EAPR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

DDFL
DDFL Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
DDFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DDFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
DDFL Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
DDFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
DDFL Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

EAPR
EAPR Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
EAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
EAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
EAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
EAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

DDFL vs. EAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Dual Directional 15 Buffer ETF - July (DDFL) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). 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.


DDFLEAPRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.71

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.39

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.71

2.90

+1.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

23.00

12.34

+10.66

DDFL vs. EAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DDFL Sharpe Ratio is 2.30, which is higher than the EAPR Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DDFL and EAPR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

DDFL vs. EAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DDFL drawdown since its inception was -1.83%, smaller than the maximum EAPR drawdown of -17.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DDFL and EAPR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


DDFLEAPRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.83%

-17.65%

+15.82%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.63%

-5.28%

+3.65%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.24%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-16.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.07%

-2.78%

+2.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.30%

-4.02%

+3.72%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.33%

1.24%

-0.91%

Volatility

DDFL vs. EAPR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Dual Directional 15 Buffer ETF - July (DDFL) is 1.26%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR) has a volatility of 4.40%. This indicates that DDFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


DDFLEAPRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.26%

4.40%

-3.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.44%

9.26%

-6.82%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.35%

9.63%

-6.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.71%

10.41%

-6.70%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.71%

10.30%

-6.59%

DDFL vs. EAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

DDFL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than EAPR's 0.89% expense ratio.


Dividends

DDFL vs. EAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither DDFL nor EAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


DDFL and EAPR have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EAPR has higher volatility (4.40%) compared to DDFL (1.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DDFL dropped -1.83% vs EAPR's -17.65%.

On 1-year performance, EAPR leads with 15.75% vs 8.10% for DDFL. On fees, DDFL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, DDFL has been the lower-risk option at 1.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, EAPR has performed better with a 15.75% return vs 8.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DDFL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EAPR.

DDFL and EAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Their fees differ too: 0.79% for DDFL and 0.89% for EAPR.

DDFL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.59), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for DDFL and EAPR

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