EBUF vs. KMAR

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

EBUF (Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) and KMAR (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. EBUF is actively managed, while KMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, EBUF returned 14.12% vs 24.41% for KMAR. Their 0.63 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. EBUF charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KMAR.

Performance

EBUF vs. KMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) 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, EBUF achieves a 9.01% return, which is significantly lower than KMAR's 12.74% return.

EBUF

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

KMAR

• 1D: 0.84%
• 1M: 0.78%
• 6M: 9.45%
• YTD: 12.74%
• 1Y: 24.41%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.47%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EBUF Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	$245.01K	$327.93K	$416.98K
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March	$120.12K	$77.14K	$163.43K

EBUF vs. KMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
EBUF Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	9.01%	9.87%
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March	12.74%	11.45%

Correlation

The correlation between EBUF and KMAR is 0.66, 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.	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2025	0.63

The correlation between EBUF and KMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

EBUF vs. KMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EBUF

EBUF Risk / Return Rank: 84
EBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
EBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
EBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 89
EBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
EBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 92

KMAR

KMAR Risk / Return Rank: 94
KMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
KMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
KMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
KMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
KMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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. KMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) 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.

	EBUF	KMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.88	2.68	-0.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.85	3.94	-1.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.52	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.04	5.01	-1.97
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.64	21.18	-4.54

EBUF vs. KMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EBUF Sharpe Ratio is 1.88, which is comparable to the KMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EBUF 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

EBUF vs. KMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EBUF drawdown since its inception was -6.49%, smaller than the maximum KMAR drawdown of -11.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBUF and KMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	EBUF	KMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.49%	-11.32%	+4.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.67%	-4.89%	+0.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.72%	0.00%	-1.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.56%	-1.26%	+0.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.85%	1.16%	-0.31%

Volatility

EBUF vs. KMAR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) has a higher volatility of 4.71% compared to Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) at 1.82%. This indicates that EBUF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EBUF	KMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.71%	1.82%	+2.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.81%	6.80%	+0.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.54%	9.17%	-1.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.32%	11.78%	-4.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.32%	11.78%	-4.46%

EBUF vs. KMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

EBUF has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than KMAR's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

EBUF vs. KMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither EBUF nor KMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EBUF and KMAR in my portfolio?

EBUF and KMAR have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EBUF or KMAR?

EBUF has higher volatility (4.71%) compared to KMAR (1.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBUF dropped -6.49% vs KMAR's -11.32%.

Which ETF is better, EBUF or KMAR?

On 1-year performance, KMAR leads with 24.41% vs 14.12% for EBUF. On fees, KMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, KMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EBUF or KMAR?

Over the 1-year period, KMAR has performed better with a 24.41% return vs 14.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EBUF or KMAR?

KMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EBUF.

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

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

What is the main difference between EBUF and KMAR?

Their fees differ too: 0.89% for EBUF and 0.79% for KMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 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.