PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
KMAR vs. BUFP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

KMAR vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KMAR achieves a 9.54% return, which is significantly higher than BUFP's 6.23% return.


KMAR

1D
-0.70%
1M
1.55%
YTD
9.54%
6M
10.29%
1Y
23.24%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BUFP

1D
-0.22%
1M
2.04%
YTD
6.23%
6M
7.00%
1Y
17.24%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KMAR vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between KMAR and BUFP is 0.77, 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

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2025

0.80

The correlation between KMAR and BUFP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 - 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

KMAR vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank

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

KMAR
KMAR Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
KMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
KMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
KMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
KMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

BUFP
BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

KMAR vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) 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.


KMARBUFPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.25

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.42

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.58

-0.11

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.77

3.93

+0.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.58

21.96

-2.39

KMAR vs. BUFP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KMAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the BUFP Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KMAR 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


KMARBUFPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.52

2.77

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.59

1.40

+0.19

Drawdowns

KMAR vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KMAR drawdown since its inception was -10.06%, smaller than the maximum BUFP drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KMAR and BUFP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


KMARBUFPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.06%

-11.98%

+1.92%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.89%

-4.41%

-0.48%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.70%

-0.22%

-0.48%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.09%

-1.00%

-0.09%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.19%

0.79%

+0.40%

Volatility

KMAR vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) has a higher volatility of 2.55% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) at 0.95%. This indicates that KMAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


KMARBUFPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.55%

0.95%

+1.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.32%

4.82%

+1.50%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.32%

6.27%

+3.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.08%

9.49%

+2.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.08%

9.49%

+2.59%

KMAR vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

KMAR vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison

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


PositionTTM20252024
BUFP
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF
0.01%0.01%0.02%
KMAR
Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March
0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


KMAR and BUFP have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

KMAR has higher volatility (2.55%) compared to BUFP (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KMAR dropped -10.06% vs BUFP's -11.98%.

On 1-year performance, KMAR leads with 23.24% vs 17.24% for BUFP. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BUFP has been the lower-risk option at 0.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, KMAR has performed better with a 23.24% return vs 17.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

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

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

BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 vs 2.52), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for KMAR and BUFP

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