GPIQ vs. QBUF

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) and QBUF (Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. GPIQ is actively managed, while QBUF is passively managed. Over the past year, GPIQ returned 25.84% vs 9.46% for QBUF. Their correlation of 0.84 means they have usually moved in the same direction. GPIQ charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QBUF.

Performance

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GPIQ achieves a 13.18% return, which is significantly higher than QBUF's 3.75% return.

GPIQ

• 1D: 1.36%
• 1M: -1.54%
• 6M: 10.62%
• YTD: 13.18%
• 1Y: 25.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 26.64%

QBUF

• 1D: 0.84%
• 1M: 0.01%
• 6M: 2.65%
• YTD: 3.75%
• 1Y: 9.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.01%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	$89.39M	$82.61M	$83.97M
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	$840.97K	$1.01M	$957.50K

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	13.18%	19.77%	7.69%
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	3.75%	11.08%	5.90%

Correlation

The correlation between GPIQ and QBUF is 0.85, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2024	0.84

The correlation between GPIQ and QBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GPIQ	QBUF
Technology	60.7%	60.2%
Communication Services	11.8%	13.3%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.9%
Consumer Defensive	6.4%	6.5%
Industrials	4.2%	2.7%
Healthcare	3.7%	3.6%
Utilities	1.4%	1.2%
Basic Materials	1.1%	1.0%
Energy	0.5%	0.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

GPIQ vs. QBUF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GPIQ

GPIQ Risk / Return Rank: 69
GPIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
GPIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
GPIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 64
GPIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
GPIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 76

QBUF

QBUF Risk / Return Rank: 67
QBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
QBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
QBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 69
QBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 79

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF). 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.

	GPIQ	QBUF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.56	1.55	+0.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.15	2.21	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.31	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.73	2.38	+0.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.62	11.08	-1.45

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GPIQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.56, which is comparable to the QBUF Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GPIQ and QBUF, 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

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GPIQ drawdown since its inception was -21.06%, which is greater than QBUF's maximum drawdown of -8.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPIQ and QBUF.

Drawdown Indicators

	GPIQ	QBUF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.06%	-8.84%	-12.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.51%	-3.99%	-5.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.62%	-1.17%	-3.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.34%	-0.83%	-1.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.69%	0.86%	+1.83%

Volatility

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) has a higher volatility of 6.41% compared to Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) at 3.33%. This indicates that GPIQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GPIQ	QBUF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.41%	3.33%	+3.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.11%	4.63%	+9.48%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.68%	6.14%	+10.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.06%	8.45%	+9.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.06%	8.45%	+9.61%

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

GPIQ has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is lower than QBUF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

GPIQ vs. QBUF - Dividend Comparison

GPIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.15%, while QBUF has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	10.15%	9.81%	9.18%	1.74%
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GPIQ and QBUF in my portfolio?

GPIQ and QBUF have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GPIQ or QBUF?

GPIQ has higher volatility (6.41%) compared to QBUF (3.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPIQ dropped -21.06% vs QBUF's -8.84%.

Which ETF is better, GPIQ or QBUF?

On 1-year performance, GPIQ leads with 25.84% vs 9.46% for QBUF. On fees, GPIQ is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, QBUF has been the lower-risk option at 3.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GPIQ or QBUF?

Over the 1-year period, GPIQ has performed better with a 25.84% return vs 9.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GPIQ or QBUF?

GPIQ is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBUF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GPIQ or QBUF?

GPIQ has the higher dividend yield at 10.15%, compared with 0.00% for QBUF.

What is the main difference between GPIQ and QBUF?

They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for GPIQ and 0.79% for QBUF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GPIQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.56 vs 1.55), 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.