EJAN vs. BILZ

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

EJAN (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January) and BILZ (PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - EJAN is a Volatility Hedged Equity fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, while BILZ is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PIMCO. EJAN is passively managed, while BILZ is actively managed. Over the past year, EJAN returned 16.24% vs 3.91% for BILZ. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. EJAN charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for BILZ.

Performance

EJAN vs. BILZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN) and PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund (BILZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EJAN achieves a 6.81% return, which is significantly higher than BILZ's 1.47% return.

EJAN

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 1.26%
• YTD: 6.81%
• 6M: 7.51%
• 1Y: 16.24%
• 3Y*: 8.61%
• 5Y*: 3.11%
• 10Y*: —

BILZ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 1.47%
• 6M: 1.76%
• 1Y: 3.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

EJAN vs. BILZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	6.81%	14.78%	2.69%	0.52%
BILZ PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund	1.47%	4.21%	5.25%	2.33%

Correlation

The correlation between EJAN and BILZ is -0.17, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2023	-0.04

The correlation between EJAN and BILZ shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

EJAN vs. BILZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

EJAN

EJAN Risk / Return Rank: 63
EJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
EJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
EJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 79
EJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
EJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 63

BILZ

BILZ Risk / Return Rank: 100
BILZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BILZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
BILZ Omega Ratio Rank: 100
BILZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
BILZ Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

EJAN vs. BILZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN) and PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund (BILZ). 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.

	EJAN	BILZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	19.09	-17.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.99	125.25	-122.26
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	53.31	-51.82
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.49	198.55	-196.05
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.66	2,000.92	-1,989.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EJAN vs. BILZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EJAN Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is lower than the BILZ Sharpe Ratio of 19.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EJAN and BILZ, 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

	EJAN	BILZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.06	19.09	-17.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.28	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.36	10.48	-10.12

Drawdowns

EJAN vs. BILZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EJAN drawdown since its inception was -22.23%, which is greater than BILZ's maximum drawdown of -0.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EJAN and BILZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	EJAN	BILZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.23%	-0.52%	-21.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.63%	-0.02%	-6.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.75%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.06%	0.00%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.79%	-0.01%	-5.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.42%	0.00%	+1.42%

Volatility

EJAN vs. BILZ - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January (EJAN) has a higher volatility of 2.10% compared to PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund (BILZ) at 0.07%. This indicates that EJAN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BILZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EJAN	BILZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.10%	0.07%	+2.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.28%	0.14%	+7.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.91%	0.21%	+7.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.11%	0.43%	+10.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.69%	0.43%	+12.26%

EJAN vs. BILZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

EJAN has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than BILZ's 0.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

EJAN vs. BILZ - Dividend Comparison

EJAN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BILZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.07%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BILZ PIMCO Ultra Short Government Active Exchange-Traded Fund	4.07%	4.19%	4.95%	2.23%
EJAN Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF January	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EJAN and BILZ in my portfolio?

EJAN and BILZ have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EJAN or BILZ?

EJAN has higher volatility (2.10%) compared to BILZ (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EJAN dropped -22.23% vs BILZ's -0.52%.

Which ETF is better, EJAN or BILZ?

On 1-year performance, EJAN leads with 16.24% vs 3.91% for BILZ. On fees, BILZ is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, BILZ has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EJAN or BILZ?

Over the 1-year period, EJAN has performed better with a 16.24% return vs 3.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EJAN or BILZ?

BILZ is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EJAN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EJAN or BILZ?

BILZ has the higher dividend yield at 4.07%, compared with 0.00% for EJAN.

What is the main difference between EJAN and BILZ?

EJAN is categorized as Volatility Hedged Equity, while BILZ is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for EJAN and 0.14% for BILZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BILZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (19.09 vs 2.06), 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.