EBUF vs. QFLR

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

EBUF (Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) and QFLR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EBUF is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Innovator, while QFLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EBUF returned 16.13% vs 26.58% for QFLR. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.89% expense ratio.

Performance

EBUF vs. QFLR - 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 Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EBUF achieves a 9.96% return, which is significantly higher than QFLR's 6.83% return.

EBUF

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 1.04%
• YTD: 9.96%
• 6M: 11.41%
• 1Y: 16.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QFLR

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 3.24%
• YTD: 6.83%
• 6M: 5.81%
• 1Y: 26.58%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EBUF vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EBUF Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	9.96%	11.55%	2.86%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	6.83%	17.27%	5.64%

Correlation

The correlation between EBUF and QFLR is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024	0.59

The correlation between EBUF and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

EBUF vs. QFLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EBUF	QFLR
Technology	36.9%	50.8%
Financial Services	19.5%	0.9%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	12.1%
Industrials	7.5%	2.8%
Communication Services	6.9%	18.4%
Basic Materials	6.5%	0.0%
Energy	4.1%	1.1%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	9.2%
Healthcare	2.9%	3.2%
Utilities	2.1%	1.5%
Real Estate	1.1%	-

Return for Risk

EBUF vs. QFLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EBUF

EBUF Risk / Return Rank: 94
EBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
EBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
EBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 95
EBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 96

QFLR

QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 74
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 75
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

EBUF vs. QFLR - 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 Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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.

	EBUF	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.92	2.37	+0.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.94	3.22	+1.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.73	1.44	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.90	3.51	+5.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	36.42	14.97	+21.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EBUF vs. QFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EBUF Sharpe Ratio is 2.92, which is comparable to the QFLR Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EBUF and QFLR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	EBUF	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.92	2.37	+0.55
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.94	1.39	+0.55

Drawdowns

EBUF vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EBUF drawdown since its inception was -6.49%, smaller than the maximum QFLR drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EBUF and QFLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	EBUF	QFLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.49%	-13.97%	+7.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.82%	-7.61%	+5.79%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.13%	-0.54%	+0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.49%	-2.49%	+2.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.44%	1.78%	-1.34%

Volatility

EBUF vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) is 1.69%, while Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) has a volatility of 2.50%. This indicates that EBUF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EBUF	QFLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.69%	2.50%	-0.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.72%	8.04%	-3.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.55%	11.27%	-5.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.65%	12.61%	-5.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.65%	12.61%	-5.96%

EBUF vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both EBUF and QFLR have an expense ratio of 0.89%.

Dividends

EBUF vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison

Neither EBUF nor QFLR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
EBUF Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	0.00%	0.02%	0.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EBUF and QFLR in my portfolio?

EBUF and QFLR have a correlation of 0.64, 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 QFLR?

QFLR has higher volatility (2.50%) compared to EBUF (1.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EBUF dropped -6.49% vs QFLR's -13.97%.

Which ETF is better, EBUF or QFLR?

On 1-year performance, QFLR leads with 26.58% vs 16.13% for EBUF. Both ETFs have the same 0.89% expense ratio. On volatility, EBUF has been the lower-risk option at 1.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EBUF or QFLR?

Over the 1-year period, QFLR has performed better with a 26.58% return vs 16.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EBUF or QFLR?

EBUF and QFLR have the same expense ratio: 0.89% per year.

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

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

What is the main difference between EBUF and QFLR?

EBUF is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EBUF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.92 vs 2.37), 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.