NAPR vs. QBUF

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

NAPR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April) and QBUF (Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) are both Nasdaq-100 funds from Innovator - NAPR tracks the NASDAQ-100 Index while QBUF tracks the Invesco QQQ Trust. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, NAPR returned 15.49% vs 9.46% for QBUF. Their correlation of 0.81 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

NAPR vs. QBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April (NAPR) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NAPR achieves a 10.42% return, which is significantly higher than QBUF's 3.75% return.

NAPR

• 1D: 0.50%
• 1M: 0.69%
• 6M: 9.63%
• YTD: 10.42%
• 1Y: 15.49%
• 3Y*: 12.25%
• 5Y*: 9.51%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.78%

QBUF

• 1D: 0.84%
• 1M: 0.01%
• 6M: 2.65%
• YTD: 3.75%
• 1Y: 9.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.01%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
NAPR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April	$239.73K	$276.59K	$582.80K
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	$840.97K	$1.01M	$957.50K

NAPR vs. QBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NAPR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April	10.42%	6.56%	5.79%
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	3.75%	11.08%	5.90%

Correlation

The correlation between NAPR and QBUF is 0.77, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.77
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2024	0.81

The correlation between NAPR and QBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

NAPR vs. QBUF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NAPR	QBUF
Technology	50.7%	60.2%
Communication Services	15.8%	13.3%
Consumer Cyclical	12.5%	10.9%
Consumer Defensive	8.7%	6.5%
Healthcare	5.1%	3.6%
Industrials	3.3%	2.7%
Utilities	1.6%	1.2%
Basic Materials	1.3%	1.0%
Energy	0.7%	0.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.1%

Return for Risk

NAPR vs. QBUF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

NAPR

NAPR Risk / Return Rank: 97
NAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
NAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
NAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
NAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
NAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

QBUF

QBUF Risk / Return Rank: 67
QBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
QBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
QBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 69
QBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 79

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

NAPR vs. QBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April (NAPR) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF). 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.

	NAPR	QBUF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.29	1.55	+1.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.23	2.21	+3.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.74	1.31	+0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.55	2.38	+5.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	36.55	11.08	+25.48

NAPR vs. QBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NAPR Sharpe Ratio is 3.29, which is higher than the QBUF Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NAPR and QBUF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

NAPR vs. QBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NAPR drawdown since its inception was -16.53%, which is greater than QBUF's maximum drawdown of -8.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NAPR and QBUF.

Drawdown Indicators

	NAPR	QBUF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.53%	-8.84%	-7.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.06%	-3.99%	+1.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.52%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.53%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.20%	-1.17%	+0.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.24%	-0.83%	-1.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.42%	0.86%	-0.44%

Volatility

NAPR vs. QBUF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April (NAPR) is 2.03%, while Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) has a volatility of 3.33%. This indicates that NAPR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NAPR	QBUF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.03%	3.33%	-1.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.12%	4.63%	-0.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.73%	6.14%	-1.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.34%	8.45%	+2.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.55%	8.45%	+2.10%

NAPR vs. QBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NAPR and QBUF have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

NAPR vs. QBUF - Dividend Comparison

Neither NAPR nor QBUF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NAPR and QBUF in my portfolio?

NAPR and QBUF 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.

Which is riskier, NAPR or QBUF?

QBUF has higher volatility (3.33%) compared to NAPR (2.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NAPR dropped -16.53% vs QBUF's -8.84%.

Which ETF is better, NAPR or QBUF?

On 1-year performance, NAPR leads with 15.49% vs 9.46% for QBUF. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, NAPR has been the lower-risk option at 2.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NAPR or QBUF?

Over the 1-year period, NAPR has performed better with a 15.49% return vs 9.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NAPR or QBUF?

NAPR and QBUF have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NAPR or QBUF?

NAPR and QBUF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between NAPR and QBUF?

NAPR tracks NASDAQ-100 Index, while QBUF tracks Invesco QQQ Trust.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.29 vs 1.55), 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.