KJAN vs. EBUF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

KJAN (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - January) and EBUF (Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. KJAN is passively managed, while EBUF is actively managed. Over the past year, KJAN returned 21.94% vs 16.62% for EBUF. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KJAN charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EBUF.

Performance

KJAN vs. EBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - January (KJAN) and Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KJAN achieves a 8.07% return, which is significantly lower than EBUF's 10.10% return.

KJAN

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 1.57%
• YTD: 8.07%
• 6M: 7.35%
• 1Y: 21.94%
• 3Y*: 12.69%
• 5Y*: 7.61%
• 10Y*: —

EBUF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.60%
• YTD: 10.10%
• 6M: 11.54%
• 1Y: 16.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

KJAN vs. EBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KJAN Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - January	8.07%	10.90%	7.30%
EBUF Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	10.10%	11.55%	2.86%

Correlation

The correlation between KJAN and EBUF 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024	0.57

The correlation between KJAN and EBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.58 - a consistent structural relationship.

KJAN vs. EBUF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KJAN	EBUF
Industrials	17.5%	7.5%
Technology	16.9%	36.9%
Healthcare	16.5%	2.9%
Financial Services	15.9%	19.5%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	9.5%
Real Estate	6.2%	1.1%
Energy	6.2%	4.1%
Basic Materials	4.8%	6.5%
Utilities	2.9%	2.1%
Communication Services	2.5%	6.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	3.0%

Return for Risk

KJAN vs. EBUF — Risk / Return Rank

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

KJAN

KJAN Risk / Return Rank: 69
KJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
KJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
KJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 61
KJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
KJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 76

EBUF

EBUF Risk / Return Rank: 94
EBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
EBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 95
EBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

KJAN vs. EBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - January (KJAN) and Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF). 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.

	KJAN	EBUF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.05	3.01	-0.96
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.01	5.08	-2.07
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.75	-0.38
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.07	9.16	-5.10
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	14.31	37.53	-23.22
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KJAN vs. EBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KJAN Sharpe Ratio is 2.05, which is lower than the EBUF Sharpe Ratio of 3.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KJAN and EBUF, 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

	KJAN	EBUF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05	3.01	-0.96
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.55	1.96	-1.41

Drawdowns

KJAN vs. EBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KJAN drawdown since its inception was -28.94%, which is greater than EBUF's maximum drawdown of -6.49%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KJAN and EBUF.

Drawdown Indicators

	KJAN	EBUF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.94%	-6.49%	-22.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.42%	-1.82%	-3.60%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.83%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.83%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.46%	0.00%	-0.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.11%	-0.49%	-3.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.54%	0.44%	+1.10%

Volatility

KJAN vs. EBUF - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - January (KJAN) has a higher volatility of 1.96% compared to Innovator Emerging Markets 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (EBUF) at 1.72%. This indicates that KJAN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KJAN	EBUF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.96%	1.72%	+0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.99%	4.71%	+2.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.78%	5.55%	+5.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.03%	6.65%	+6.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.42%	6.65%	+8.77%

KJAN vs. EBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

KJAN has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than EBUF's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

KJAN vs. EBUF - Dividend Comparison

Neither KJAN nor EBUF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KJAN and EBUF in my portfolio?

KJAN and EBUF 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, KJAN or EBUF?

KJAN has higher volatility (1.96%) compared to EBUF (1.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KJAN dropped -28.94% vs EBUF's -6.49%.

Which ETF is better, KJAN or EBUF?

On 1-year performance, KJAN leads with 21.94% vs 16.62% for EBUF. On fees, KJAN is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, EBUF has been the lower-risk option at 1.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KJAN or EBUF?

Over the 1-year period, KJAN has performed better with a 21.94% return vs 16.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KJAN or EBUF?

KJAN is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EBUF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KJAN or EBUF?

KJAN and EBUF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between KJAN and EBUF?

Their fees differ too: 0.79% for KJAN and 0.89% for EBUF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EBUF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 vs 2.05), 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.