IGTR vs. BALT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

IGTR (Innovator Gradient Tactical Rotation Strategy ETF) and BALT (Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IGTR is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Innovator, while BALT is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500. IGTR is actively managed, while BALT is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, IGTR returned 17.59%/yr vs 7.27%/yr for BALT. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IGTR charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for BALT.

Performance

IGTR vs. BALT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Gradient Tactical Rotation Strategy ETF (IGTR) 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, IGTR achieves a 21.49% return, which is significantly higher than BALT's 1.91% return.

IGTR

• 1D: -0.47%
• 1M: 13.18%
• YTD: 21.49%
• 6M: 24.80%
• 1Y: 43.30%
• 3Y*: 17.59%
• 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)

IGTR vs. BALT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
IGTR Innovator Gradient Tactical Rotation Strategy ETF	21.49%	15.25%	4.02%	-0.31%	-2.08%
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF	1.91%	6.65%	9.98%	7.45%	1.04%

Correlation

The correlation between IGTR and BALT is 0.58, 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	0.58
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2022	0.61

The correlation between IGTR and BALT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

IGTR vs. BALT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IGTR	BALT
Financial Services	25.7%	11.9%
Industrials	20.7%	8.1%
Technology	13.2%	36.2%
Healthcare	8.2%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	8.1%	10.1%
Basic Materials	8.1%	1.8%
Energy	4.8%	3.5%
Real Estate	3.5%	1.9%
Consumer Defensive	3.3%	4.9%
Communication Services	2.4%	10.9%
Utilities	2.0%	2.3%

Return for Risk

IGTR vs. BALT — Risk / Return Rank

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

IGTR

IGTR Risk / Return Rank: 71
IGTR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
IGTR Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
IGTR Omega Ratio Rank: 66
IGTR Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
IGTR Martin Ratio Rank: 74

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.

IGTR vs. BALT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Gradient Tactical Rotation Strategy ETF (IGTR) 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.

	IGTR	BALT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.25	3.19	-0.93
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.00	4.88	-1.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.67	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.89	6.05	-2.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.97	22.58	-8.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IGTR vs. BALT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IGTR Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is comparable to the BALT Sharpe Ratio of 3.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IGTR 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

	IGTR	BALT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.25	3.19	-0.93
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.63	1.80	-1.17

Drawdowns

IGTR vs. BALT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IGTR drawdown since its inception was -20.06%, which is greater than BALT's maximum drawdown of -4.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IGTR and BALT.

Drawdown Indicators

	IGTR	BALT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.06%	-4.89%	-15.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.18%	-1.15%	-10.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.06%	-4.89%	-15.17%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.47%	-0.06%	-0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.97%	-0.34%	-6.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.11%	0.31%	+2.80%

Volatility

IGTR vs. BALT - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Gradient Tactical Rotation Strategy ETF (IGTR) has a higher volatility of 7.29% compared to Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT) at 0.37%. This indicates that IGTR'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

	IGTR	BALT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.29%	0.37%	+6.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.97%	1.56%	+12.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.32%	2.19%	+17.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.82%	3.32%	+13.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.82%	3.32%	+13.50%

IGTR vs. BALT - Expense Ratio Comparison

IGTR has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than BALT's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

IGTR vs. BALT - Dividend Comparison

IGTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.66%, while BALT has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IGTR Innovator Gradient Tactical Rotation Strategy ETF	0.66%	0.80%	2.40%	0.87%	0.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IGTR and BALT in my portfolio?

IGTR and BALT have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IGTR or BALT?

IGTR has higher volatility (7.29%) compared to BALT (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IGTR dropped -20.06% vs BALT's -4.89%.

Which ETF is better, IGTR or BALT?

On 3-year performance, IGTR leads with 17.59% vs 7.27% for BALT. On fees, BALT is cheaper at 0.69% 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, IGTR or BALT?

Over the 3-year period, IGTR has performed better with a 17.59% return vs 7.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IGTR or BALT?

BALT is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for IGTR.

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

IGTR has the higher dividend yield at 0.66%, compared with 0.00% for BALT.

What is the main difference between IGTR and BALT?

IGTR is categorized as Global Equities, while BALT is Defined Outcome. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for IGTR and 0.69% for BALT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BALT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 2.25), 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.