KJUL vs. PMAP
KJUL (Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July) and PMAP (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. KJUL is passively managed, while PMAP is actively managed. Over the past year, KJUL returned 18.66% vs 7.34% for PMAP. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. KJUL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMAP.
Performance
KJUL vs. PMAP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, KJUL achieves a 6.53% return, which is significantly higher than PMAP's 3.28% return.
KJUL
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 1.15%
- YTD
- 6.53%
- 6M
- 7.06%
- 1Y
- 18.66%
- 3Y*
- 10.66%
- 5Y*
- 4.93%
- 10Y*
- —
PMAP
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.59%
- YTD
- 3.28%
- 6M
- 3.83%
- 1Y
- 7.34%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KJUL vs. PMAP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
KJUL Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July | 6.53% | 13.43% |
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April | 3.28% | 5.37% |
Correlation
The correlation between KJUL and PMAP is 0.72, 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 | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025 | 0.72 |
The correlation between KJUL and PMAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
KJUL vs. PMAP — Risk / Return Rank
KJUL
PMAP
KJUL vs. PMAP - 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 S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). 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 | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -9.90 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | 2.92 | -1.46 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.47 | 21.40 | -15.92 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.24 | 133.92 | -113.68 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| KJUL | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.35 | 6.43 | -4.08 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.40 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.57 | 3.23 | -2.67 |
Drawdowns
KJUL vs. PMAP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum KJUL drawdown since its inception was -16.69%, which is greater than PMAP's maximum drawdown of -1.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KJUL and PMAP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| KJUL | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.69% | -1.75% | -14.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.42% | -0.34% | -3.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.45% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.69% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.10% | -0.06% | -0.04% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.00% | -0.08% | -3.92% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.92% | 0.05% | +0.87% |
Volatility
KJUL vs. PMAP - Volatility Comparison
Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July (KJUL) has a higher volatility of 0.61% compared to PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) at 0.27%. This indicates that KJUL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| KJUL | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.61% | 0.27% | +0.34% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.77% | 0.81% | +3.96% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.06% | 1.15% | +6.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.31% | 2.33% | +9.98% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.67% | 2.33% | +9.34% |
KJUL vs. PMAP - Expense Ratio Comparison
KJUL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAP's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
KJUL vs. PMAP - Dividend Comparison
Neither KJUL nor PMAP has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
KJUL and PMAP have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KJUL has higher volatility (0.61%) compared to PMAP (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KJUL dropped -16.69% vs PMAP's -1.75%.
On 1-year performance, KJUL leads with 18.66% vs 7.34% for PMAP. On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, KJUL has performed better with a 18.66% return vs 7.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PMAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KJUL.
KJUL and PMAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Innovator and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for KJUL and 0.50% for PMAP.
PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.43 vs 2.35), 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.
Find the right allocation for KJUL and PMAP
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer