FNOV vs. KMAR

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

FNOV (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - November) and KMAR (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds - FNOV tracks the S&P 500 while KMAR tracks the iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) Price Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FNOV returned 16.62% vs 23.23% for KMAR. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FNOV charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KMAR.

Performance

FNOV vs. KMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - November (FNOV) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNOV achieves a 5.47% return, which is significantly lower than KMAR's 11.31% return.

FNOV

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: -0.28%
• YTD: 5.47%
• 6M: 4.82%
• 1Y: 16.62%
• 3Y*: 13.58%
• 5Y*: 8.90%
• 10Y*: —

KMAR

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: 1.99%
• YTD: 11.31%
• 6M: 10.34%
• 1Y: 23.23%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FNOV vs. KMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FNOV FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - November	5.47%	13.26%
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March	11.31%	11.45%

Correlation

The correlation between FNOV and KMAR is 0.79, 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	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2025	0.83

The correlation between FNOV and KMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FNOV vs. KMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNOV

FNOV Risk / Return Rank: 80
FNOV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
FNOV Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FNOV Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FNOV Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
FNOV Martin Ratio Rank: 85

KMAR

KMAR Risk / Return Rank: 89
KMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
KMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
KMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 87
KMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
KMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

FNOV vs. KMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - November (FNOV) 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.

	FNOV	KMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.23	2.48	-0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.20	3.61	-0.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.46	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.92	4.77	-1.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.25	19.52	-4.27

FNOV vs. KMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNOV Sharpe Ratio is 2.23, which is comparable to the KMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNOV and KMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FNOV vs. KMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNOV drawdown since its inception was -24.41%, which is greater than KMAR's maximum drawdown of -11.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNOV and KMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNOV	KMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.41%	-11.32%	-13.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.71%	-4.89%	-0.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.11%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-15.87%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.10%	-0.30%	-0.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.90%	-1.34%	-1.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.09%	1.19%	-0.10%

Volatility

FNOV vs. KMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - November (FNOV) is 2.23%, while Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) has a volatility of 2.99%. This indicates that FNOV 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.

Volatility by Period

	FNOV	KMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.23%	2.99%	-0.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.97%	6.72%	-0.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.54%	9.44%	-1.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.52%	12.15%	-0.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.64%	12.15%	+1.49%

FNOV vs. KMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNOV has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than KMAR's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNOV vs. KMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither FNOV nor KMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNOV and KMAR in my portfolio?

FNOV and KMAR have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FNOV or KMAR?

KMAR has higher volatility (2.99%) compared to FNOV (2.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNOV dropped -24.41% vs KMAR's -11.32%.

Which ETF is better, FNOV or KMAR?

On 1-year performance, KMAR leads with 23.23% vs 16.62% for FNOV. On fees, KMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, FNOV has been the lower-risk option at 2.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNOV or KMAR?

Over the 1-year period, KMAR has performed better with a 23.23% return vs 16.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNOV or KMAR?

KMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FNOV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FNOV or KMAR?

FNOV and KMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FNOV and KMAR?

FNOV tracks S&P 500, while KMAR tracks iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) Price Return. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FNOV and 0.79% for KMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 2.23), 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.