ISEP vs. YCS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ISEP (Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - September) and YCS (ProShares UltraShort Yen) are both exchange-traded funds - ISEP is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Innovator, while YCS is a Leveraged Currency fund tracking the USD/JPY Exchange Rate (-200%). ISEP is actively managed, while YCS is passively managed. Over the past year, ISEP returned 12.58% vs 32.82% for YCS. At a correlation of -0.29, they often move in opposite directions. ISEP charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.00%/yr for YCS.

Performance

ISEP vs. YCS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - September (ISEP) and ProShares UltraShort Yen (YCS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ISEP achieves a 5.04% return, which is significantly lower than YCS's 7.17% return.

ISEP

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 1.97%
• YTD: 5.04%
• 6M: 6.62%
• 1Y: 12.58%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

YCS

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 4.42%
• YTD: 7.17%
• 6M: 10.05%
• 1Y: 32.82%
• 3Y*: 19.84%
• 5Y*: 23.54%
• 10Y*: 12.34%

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

ISEP vs. YCS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ISEP Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - September	5.04%	18.29%	5.41%	4.60%
YCS ProShares UltraShort Yen	7.17%	9.04%	35.41%	-3.07%

Correlation

The correlation between ISEP and YCS is -0.43, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 5, 2023	-0.29

The correlation between ISEP and YCS shifts across timeframes, from -0.43 (1 year) to -0.29 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

ISEP vs. YCS — Risk / Return Rank

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

ISEP

ISEP Risk / Return Rank: 45
ISEP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
ISEP Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
ISEP Omega Ratio Rank: 42
ISEP Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
ISEP Martin Ratio Rank: 50

YCS

YCS Risk / Return Rank: 61
YCS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
YCS Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
YCS Omega Ratio Rank: 56
YCS Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
YCS Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

ISEP vs. YCS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - September (ISEP) and ProShares UltraShort Yen (YCS). 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.

	ISEP	YCS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	1.92	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.12	2.44	-0.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.35	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.31	3.97	-1.66
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.20	12.40	-4.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ISEP vs. YCS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ISEP Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is comparable to the YCS Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ISEP and YCS, 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

	ISEP	YCS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.44	1.92	-0.48
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.12	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.65	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.28	0.33	+0.95

Drawdowns

ISEP vs. YCS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ISEP drawdown since its inception was -7.36%, smaller than the maximum YCS drawdown of -49.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ISEP and YCS.

Drawdown Indicators

	ISEP	YCS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.36%	-49.56%	+42.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.48%	-8.30%	+2.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.05%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-27.32%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-27.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.28%	0.00%	-0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.52%	-19.93%	+18.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.54%	2.66%	-1.12%

Volatility

ISEP vs. YCS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - September (ISEP) is 2.19%, while ProShares UltraShort Yen (YCS) has a volatility of 2.75%. This indicates that ISEP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than YCS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ISEP	YCS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.19%	2.75%	-0.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.20%	12.32%	-6.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.81%	17.27%	-8.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.53%	21.10%	-11.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.53%	19.01%	-9.48%

ISEP vs. YCS - Expense Ratio Comparison

ISEP has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than YCS's 1.00% expense ratio.

Dividends

ISEP vs. YCS - Dividend Comparison

Neither ISEP nor YCS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ISEP and YCS in my portfolio?

ISEP and YCS have a correlation of -0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ISEP or YCS?

YCS has higher volatility (2.75%) compared to ISEP (2.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ISEP dropped -7.36% vs YCS's -49.56%.

Which ETF is better, ISEP or YCS?

On 1-year performance, YCS leads with 32.82% vs 12.58% for ISEP. On fees, ISEP is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, ISEP has been the lower-risk option at 2.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ISEP or YCS?

Over the 1-year period, YCS has performed better with a 32.82% return vs 12.58%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ISEP or YCS?

ISEP is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for YCS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ISEP or YCS?

ISEP and YCS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between ISEP and YCS?

ISEP is categorized as Defined Outcome, while YCS is Leveraged Currency. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for ISEP and 1.00% for YCS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

YCS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.92 vs 1.44), 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.