FBUF vs. BALT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FBUF (Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF) and BALT (Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. FBUF is actively managed, while BALT is passively managed. Over the past year, FBUF returned 19.61% vs 6.95% for BALT. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FBUF charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for BALT.

Performance

FBUF vs. BALT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) and Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBUF achieves a 5.32% return, which is significantly higher than BALT's 1.91% return.

FBUF

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 2.85%
• YTD: 5.32%
• 6M: 6.28%
• 1Y: 19.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BALT

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.53%
• YTD: 1.91%
• 6M: 2.81%
• 1Y: 6.95%
• 3Y*: 7.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FBUF vs. BALT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF	5.32%	14.01%	10.13%
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF	1.91%	6.65%	7.53%

Correlation

The correlation between FBUF and BALT is 0.71, 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	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2024	0.76

The correlation between FBUF and BALT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FBUF vs. BALT — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBUF

FBUF Risk / Return Rank: 79
FBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
FBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
FBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
FBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

BALT

BALT Risk / Return Rank: 92
BALT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
BALT Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
BALT Omega Ratio Rank: 93
BALT Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
BALT Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

FBUF vs. BALT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) and Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT). 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.

	FBUF	BALT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.63	3.19	-0.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.55	4.88	-1.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.67	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.51	6.05	-2.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.68	22.58	-6.90
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FBUF vs. BALT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBUF Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is comparable to the BALT Sharpe Ratio of 3.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBUF and BALT, 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

	FBUF	BALT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.63	3.19	-0.56
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.47	1.80	-0.33

Drawdowns

FBUF vs. BALT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBUF drawdown since its inception was -11.09%, which is greater than BALT's maximum drawdown of -4.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBUF and BALT.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBUF	BALT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.09%	-4.89%	-6.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.61%	-1.15%	-4.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-4.89%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.22%	-0.06%	-0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.38%	-0.34%	-1.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.25%	0.31%	+0.94%

Volatility

FBUF vs. BALT - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) has a higher volatility of 1.11% compared to Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT) at 0.37%. This indicates that FBUF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BALT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBUF	BALT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.11%	0.37%	+0.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.37%	1.56%	+3.81%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.49%	2.19%	+5.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.55%	3.32%	+6.23%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.55%	3.32%	+6.23%

FBUF vs. BALT - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBUF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than BALT's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

FBUF vs. BALT - Dividend Comparison

FBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, while BALT has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF	0.63%	0.64%	0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBUF and BALT in my portfolio?

FBUF and BALT have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBUF or BALT?

FBUF has higher volatility (1.11%) compared to BALT (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBUF dropped -11.09% vs BALT's -4.89%.

Which ETF is better, FBUF or BALT?

On 1-year performance, FBUF leads with 19.61% vs 6.95% for BALT. On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, BALT has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBUF or BALT?

Over the 1-year period, FBUF has performed better with a 19.61% return vs 6.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBUF or BALT?

FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for BALT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBUF or BALT?

FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.00% for BALT.

What is the main difference between FBUF and BALT?

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for FBUF and 0.69% for BALT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BALT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 2.63), 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.