KJUL vs. BUFP

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

KJUL (Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July) and BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds - KJUL tracks the iShares Russell 2000 ETF while BUFP tracks the S&P 500. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, KJUL returned 20.14% vs 18.00% for BUFP. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KJUL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for BUFP.

Performance

KJUL vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July (KJUL) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with KJUL having a 6.64% return and BUFP slightly lower at 6.46%.

KJUL

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 1.09%
• YTD: 6.64%
• 6M: 7.81%
• 1Y: 20.14%
• 3Y*: 10.70%
• 5Y*: 4.96%
• 10Y*: —

BUFP

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 2.04%
• YTD: 6.46%
• 6M: 7.37%
• 1Y: 18.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

KJUL vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KJUL Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July	6.64%	7.70%	6.99%
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	6.46%	12.92%	6.36%

Correlation

The correlation between KJUL and BUFP is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024	0.73

The correlation between KJUL and BUFP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

KJUL vs. BUFP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	KJUL	BUFP
Industrials	17.5%	8.1%
Technology	16.9%	36.2%
Healthcare	16.5%	8.4%
Financial Services	15.9%	11.9%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	10.1%
Real Estate	6.2%	1.9%
Energy	6.2%	3.5%
Basic Materials	4.8%	1.8%
Utilities	2.9%	2.3%
Communication Services	2.5%	10.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	4.9%

Return for Risk

KJUL vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank

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

KJUL

KJUL Risk / Return Rank: 84
KJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
KJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
KJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 80
KJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
KJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 90

BUFP

BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 88
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 91
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

KJUL vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July (KJUL) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). 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.

	KJUL	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.51	2.89	-0.38
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.75	4.30	-0.55
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.60	-0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.84	4.14	+1.70
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	21.64	23.20	-1.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

KJUL vs. BUFP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is comparable to the BUFP Sharpe Ratio of 2.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KJUL and BUFP, 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

	KJUL	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.51	2.89	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.41	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.57	1.41	-0.84

Drawdowns

KJUL vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KJUL drawdown since its inception was -16.69%, which is greater than BUFP's maximum drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KJUL and BUFP.

Drawdown Indicators

	KJUL	BUFP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.69%	-11.98%	-4.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.42%	-4.41%	+0.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.45%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.01%	-1.01%	-3.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.92%	0.79%	+0.13%

Volatility

KJUL vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July (KJUL) is 0.63%, while PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) has a volatility of 0.95%. This indicates that KJUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KJUL	BUFP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.63%	0.95%	-0.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.79%	4.81%	-0.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.06%	6.27%	+1.79%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.31%	9.49%	+2.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.68%	9.49%	+2.19%

KJUL vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison

KJUL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than BUFP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

KJUL vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison

KJUL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%
KJUL Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KJUL and BUFP in my portfolio?

KJUL and BUFP have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, KJUL or BUFP?

BUFP has higher volatility (0.95%) compared to KJUL (0.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KJUL dropped -16.69% vs BUFP's -11.98%.

Which ETF is better, KJUL or BUFP?

On 1-year performance, KJUL leads with 20.14% vs 18.00% for BUFP. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, KJUL has been the lower-risk option at 0.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KJUL or BUFP?

Over the 1-year period, KJUL has performed better with a 20.14% return vs 18.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KJUL or BUFP?

BUFP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KJUL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KJUL or BUFP?

BUFP has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for KJUL.

What is the main difference between KJUL and BUFP?

KJUL tracks iShares Russell 2000 ETF, while BUFP tracks S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for KJUL and 0.50% for BUFP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.89 vs 2.51), 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.