PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EBUF vs. CPRA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EBUF vs. CPRA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) and Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EBUF achieves a 9.01% return, which is significantly higher than CPRA's 4.77% return.


EBUF

1D
0.40%
1M
0.51%
6M
7.31%
YTD
9.01%
1Y
14.12%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
11.26%

CPRA

1D
0.18%
1M
0.50%
6M
4.06%
YTD
4.77%
1Y
9.06%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
8.85%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$23.72K$26.42K$31.57K
$245.01K$327.93K$416.98K

EBUF vs. CPRA - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between EBUF and CPRA is 0.59, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


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

0.59

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

0.56

The correlation between EBUF and CPRA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

EBUF vs. CPRA — Risk / Return Rank

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

EBUF
EBUF Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
EBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
EBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
EBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
EBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

CPRA
CPRA Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
CPRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CPRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
CPRA Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
CPRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
CPRA Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

EBUF vs. CPRA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) and Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA). 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.


EBUFCPRADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.43

2.05

-0.62

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.04

10.20

-7.17

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

16.64

58.41

-41.76

EBUF vs. CPRA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EBUF Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is lower than the CPRA Sharpe Ratio of 4.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EBUF and CPRA, 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

EBUF vs. CPRA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EBUF drawdown since its inception was -6.49%, which is greater than CPRA's maximum drawdown of -1.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBUF and CPRA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EBUFCPRADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-6.49%

-1.69%

-4.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.67%

-0.89%

-3.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.72%

0.00%

-1.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.56%

-0.14%

-0.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.85%

0.16%

+0.69%

Volatility

EBUF vs. CPRA - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) has a higher volatility of 4.71% compared to Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA) at 0.47%. This indicates that EBUF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CPRA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EBUFCPRADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.71%

0.47%

+4.24%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.81%

1.36%

+5.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.54%

2.13%

+5.41%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.32%

2.71%

+4.61%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.32%

2.71%

+4.61%

EBUF vs. CPRA - Expense Ratio Comparison

EBUF has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than CPRA's 0.69% expense ratio.


Dividends

EBUF vs. CPRA - Dividend Comparison

Neither EBUF nor CPRA has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


EBUF and CPRA have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EBUF has higher volatility (4.71%) compared to CPRA (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBUF dropped -6.49% vs CPRA's -1.69%.

On 1-year performance, EBUF leads with 14.12% vs 9.06% for CPRA. On fees, CPRA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CPRA has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, EBUF has performed better with a 14.12% return vs 9.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CPRA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EBUF.

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

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for EBUF and 0.69% for CPRA.

CPRA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.28 vs 1.88), 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 EBUF and CPRA

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