MAYP vs. KMAR
MAYP (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - May) and KMAR (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. MAYP is actively managed, while KMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, MAYP returned 10.67% vs 23.23% for KMAR. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MAYP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for KMAR.
Performance
MAYP vs. KMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MAYP achieves a 3.98% return, which is significantly lower than KMAR's 11.31% return.
MAYP
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.11%
- YTD
- 3.98%
- 6M
- 3.95%
- 1Y
- 10.67%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
KMAR
- 1D
- 0.23%
- 1M
- 1.99%
- YTD
- 11.31%
- 6M
- 10.34%
- 1Y
- 23.23%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MAYP vs. KMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MAYP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - May | 3.98% | 9.11% |
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March | 11.31% | 11.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between MAYP and KMAR is 0.73, 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 | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2025 | 0.77 |
The correlation between MAYP and KMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.77 - 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
MAYP vs. KMAR — Risk / Return Rank
MAYP
KMAR
MAYP vs. KMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - May (MAYP) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR). 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.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| MAYP | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.49 | 1.46 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.04 | 4.77 | +0.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 24.28 | 19.52 | +4.76 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MAYP vs. KMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MAYP drawdown since its inception was -11.06%, roughly equal to the maximum KMAR drawdown of -11.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAYP and KMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MAYP | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.06% | -11.32% | +0.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.13% | -4.89% | +2.76% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.27% | -0.30% | -0.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.66% | -1.34% | +0.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.44% | 1.19% | -0.75% |
Volatility
MAYP vs. KMAR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - May (MAYP) is 2.52%, while Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) has a volatility of 2.99%. This indicates that MAYP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MAYP | KMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.52% | 2.99% | -0.47% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.18% | 6.72% | -2.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.87% | 9.44% | -4.57% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.25% | 12.15% | -2.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.25% | 12.15% | -2.90% |
MAYP vs. KMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
MAYP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than KMAR's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
MAYP vs. KMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither MAYP nor KMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
MAYP and KMAR have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
KMAR has higher volatility (2.99%) compared to MAYP (2.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAYP dropped -11.06% vs KMAR's -11.32%.
On 1-year performance, KMAR leads with 23.23% vs 10.67% for MAYP. On fees, MAYP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, MAYP has been the lower-risk option at 2.52%. 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 23.23% return vs 10.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MAYP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for KMAR.
MAYP and KMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MAYP and 0.79% for KMAR.
KMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 2.22), 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 MAYP and KMAR
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