FBUF vs. UMAY
FBUF (Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF) and UMAY (Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May) are both Defined Outcome funds. FBUF is actively managed, while UMAY is passively managed. Over the past year, FBUF returned 19.61% vs 10.48% for UMAY. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FBUF charges 0.48%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for UMAY.
Performance
FBUF vs. UMAY - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FBUF achieves a 5.32% return, which is significantly higher than UMAY's 3.93% return.
FBUF
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 2.85%
- YTD
- 5.32%
- 6M
- 6.28%
- 1Y
- 19.61%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
UMAY
- 1D
- -0.27%
- 1M
- 1.86%
- YTD
- 3.93%
- 6M
- 4.74%
- 1Y
- 10.48%
- 3Y*
- 11.51%
- 5Y*
- 6.49%
- 10Y*
- —
FBUF vs. UMAY - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF | 5.32% | 14.01% | 10.13% |
UMAY Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May | 3.93% | 8.79% | 10.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between FBUF and UMAY is 0.80, 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 | 0.80 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 12, 2024 | 0.84 |
The correlation between FBUF and UMAY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.84 - 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
FBUF vs. UMAY — Risk / Return Rank
FBUF
UMAY
FBUF vs. UMAY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) and Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May (UMAY). 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 | UMAY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.08 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.53 | 1.67 | -0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.51 | 7.71 | -4.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.68 | 39.51 | -23.83 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FBUF | UMAY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.63 | 2.99 | -0.35 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.77 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.47 | 0.86 | +0.61 |
Drawdowns
FBUF vs. UMAY - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FBUF drawdown since its inception was -11.09%, smaller than the maximum UMAY drawdown of -12.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBUF and UMAY.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FBUF | UMAY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.09% | -12.12% | +1.03% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.61% | -1.36% | -4.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -10.49% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -12.12% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.22% | -0.27% | +0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.38% | -2.14% | +0.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.25% | 0.27% | +0.98% |
Volatility
FBUF vs. UMAY - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) is 1.11%, while Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May (UMAY) has a volatility of 1.20%. This indicates that FBUF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UMAY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FBUF | UMAY | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.11% | 1.20% | -0.09% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.37% | 2.40% | +2.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.49% | 3.53% | +3.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.55% | 8.46% | +1.09% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.55% | 7.93% | +1.62% |
FBUF vs. UMAY - Expense Ratio Comparison
FBUF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than UMAY's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
FBUF vs. UMAY - Dividend Comparison
FBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, while UMAY has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF | 0.63% | 0.64% | 0.54% |
UMAY Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FBUF and UMAY have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
UMAY has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to FBUF (1.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBUF dropped -11.09% vs UMAY's -12.12%.
On 1-year performance, FBUF leads with 19.61% vs 10.48% for UMAY. On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FBUF has performed better with a 19.61% return vs 10.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for UMAY.
FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.00% for UMAY.
They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for FBUF and 0.79% for UMAY.
UMAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 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.
Find the right allocation for FBUF and UMAY
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