IBFR vs. TMAR

Last updated Jun 27, 2026

IBFR (Innovator International Developed Managed 10 Buffer ETF) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. IBFR is actively managed, while TMAR is passively managed. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IBFR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.

Performance

IBFR vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator International Developed Managed 10 Buffer ETF (IBFR) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

IBFR

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TMAR

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: -1.33%
• YTD: 12.53%
• 6M: 12.55%
• 1Y: 22.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBFR vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
IBFR Innovator International Developed Managed 10 Buffer ETF	-0.69%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	10.88%

Correlation

The correlation between IBFR and TMAR is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2026	0.65

Return for Risk

IBFR vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBFR

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 86
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 91
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

IBFR vs. TMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator International Developed Managed 10 Buffer ETF (IBFR) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.

	IBFR	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.08	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.96	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.51	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	4.80	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	22.61	—

Drawdowns

IBFR vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBFR drawdown since its inception was -5.70%, smaller than the maximum TMAR drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBFR and TMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBFR	TMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.70%	-9.93%	+4.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-4.69%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.20%	-2.68%	+1.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.78%	-0.74%	-2.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.99%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	IBFR	TMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	6.03%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	10.00%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.52%	10.85%	-1.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.52%	12.28%	-2.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.52%	12.28%	-2.76%

IBFR vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBFR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBFR vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

IBFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.23%, while TMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM
IBFR Innovator International Developed Managed 10 Buffer ETF	0.23%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBFR and TMAR in my portfolio?

IBFR and TMAR have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, IBFR or TMAR?

On fees, IBFR is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBFR or TMAR?

IBFR is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBFR or TMAR?

IBFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.23%, compared with 0.00% for TMAR.

What is the main difference between IBFR and TMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for IBFR and 0.95% for TMAR.