PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EJUL vs. ZMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EJUL vs. ZMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July (EJUL) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EJUL achieves a 4.79% return, which is significantly higher than ZMAR's 2.63% return.


EJUL

1D
0.16%
1M
0.58%
YTD
4.79%
6M
6.15%
1Y
17.58%
3Y*
10.38%
5Y*
3.05%
10Y*

ZMAR

1D
-0.03%
1M
0.63%
YTD
2.63%
6M
3.22%
1Y
7.54%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EJUL vs. ZMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between EJUL and ZMAR is 0.60, 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

0.60

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2025

0.54

The correlation between EJUL and ZMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.60 - 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

EJUL vs. ZMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EJUL
EJUL Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
EJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
EJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
EJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
EJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank

ZMAR
ZMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
ZMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
ZMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EJUL vs. ZMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July (EJUL) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR). 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.


EJULZMARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.53

1.83

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.64

5.26

-0.62

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

20.22

30.04

-9.83

EJUL vs. ZMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is lower than the ZMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EJUL and ZMAR, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


EJULZMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.45

3.57

-1.12

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.27

2.27

-2.01

Drawdowns

EJUL vs. ZMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EJUL drawdown since its inception was -21.61%, which is greater than ZMAR's maximum drawdown of -2.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EJUL and ZMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EJULZMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.61%

-2.30%

-19.31%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.81%

-1.44%

-2.37%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-8.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.61%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.06%

-0.08%

+0.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.61%

-0.22%

-6.39%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.87%

0.25%

+0.62%

Volatility

EJUL vs. ZMAR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July (EJUL) has a higher volatility of 0.83% compared to Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR) at 0.37%. This indicates that EJUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EJULZMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.83%

0.37%

+0.46%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.73%

1.57%

+3.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.30%

2.12%

+5.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.66%

3.04%

+7.62%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.44%

3.04%

+8.40%

EJUL vs. ZMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

EJUL has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than ZMAR's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

EJUL vs. ZMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither EJUL nor ZMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019
EJUL
Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - July
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.64%
ZMAR
Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


EJUL and ZMAR have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EJUL has higher volatility (0.83%) compared to ZMAR (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EJUL dropped -21.61% vs ZMAR's -2.30%.

On 1-year performance, EJUL leads with 17.58% vs 7.54% for ZMAR. On fees, ZMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, ZMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, EJUL has performed better with a 17.58% return vs 7.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ZMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EJUL.

EJUL and ZMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Their fees differ too: 0.89% for EJUL and 0.79% for ZMAR.

ZMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.57 vs 2.45), 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 EJUL and ZMAR

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