FB vs. KMAR
FB (ProShares S&P 500 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) and KMAR (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds - FB tracks the S&P 500 while KMAR tracks the iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) Price Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FB returned 11.37% vs 23.20% for KMAR. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FB charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KMAR.
Performance
FB vs. KMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FB achieves a 5.25% return, which is significantly lower than KMAR's 11.60% return.
FB
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- -0.73%
- YTD
- 5.25%
- 6M
- 5.14%
- 1Y
- 11.37%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KMAR
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 1.20%
- YTD
- 11.60%
- 6M
- 10.80%
- 1Y
- 23.20%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FB vs. KMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FB ProShares S&P 500 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 5.25% | 6.10% |
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March | 11.60% | 11.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between FB and KMAR is 0.57, 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 | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025 | 0.55 |
The correlation between FB and KMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.57 - 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
FB vs. KMAR — Risk / Return Rank
FB
KMAR
FB vs. KMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares S&P 500 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (FB) 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.
| FB | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.00 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.14 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.47 | +0.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 7.04 | 4.76 | +2.28 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 25.23 | 19.49 | +5.74 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FB vs. KMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FB drawdown since its inception was -1.76%, smaller than the maximum KMAR drawdown of -11.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FB and KMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FB | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.76% | -11.32% | +9.56% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.76% | -4.89% | +3.13% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.89% | -0.03% | -0.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.33% | -1.33% | +1.00% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.49% | 1.19% | -0.70% |
Volatility
FB vs. KMAR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ProShares S&P 500 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (FB) is 2.11%, while Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) has a volatility of 2.91%. This indicates that FB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FB | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.11% | 2.91% | -0.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.56% | 6.71% | -3.15% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.00% | 9.39% | -4.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.00% | 12.11% | -7.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.00% | 12.11% | -7.11% |
FB vs. KMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
FB has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than KMAR's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
FB vs. KMAR - Dividend Comparison
FB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.02%, while KMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
FB ProShares S&P 500 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 2.02% | 0.92% |
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FB and KMAR have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KMAR has higher volatility (2.91%) compared to FB (2.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FB dropped -1.76% vs KMAR's -11.32%.
On 1-year performance, KMAR leads with 23.20% vs 11.37% for FB. On fees, FB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, FB has been the lower-risk option at 2.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, KMAR has performed better with a 23.20% return vs 11.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KMAR.
FB has the higher dividend yield at 2.02%, compared with 0.00% for KMAR.
FB tracks S&P 500, while KMAR tracks iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) Price Return. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for FB and 0.79% for KMAR.
FB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.49 vs 2.49), 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.
Find the right allocation for FB and KMAR
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