NBFR vs. BALT
NBFR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed 10 Buffer ETF) and BALT (Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. NBFR is actively managed, while BALT is passively managed. Their 0.51 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NBFR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for BALT.
Performance
NBFR vs. BALT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
NBFR
- 1D
- 0.95%
- 1M
- -1.80%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
BALT
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- 0.45%
- 6M
- 2.21%
- YTD
- 2.78%
- 1Y
- 6.82%
- 3Y*
- 6.98%
- 5Y*
- 5.98%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 5.93%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $14.85M | $18.00M | $16.07M | |
| $83.82K | $58.88K | $223.65K |
NBFR vs. BALT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
NBFR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed 10 Buffer ETF | 3.36% |
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF | 2.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between NBFR and BALT is 0.51, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 24, 2026 | 0.51 |
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
NBFR vs. BALT — Risk / Return Rank
NBFR
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BALT
NBFR vs. BALT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed 10 Buffer ETF (NBFR) and Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF (BALT). 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.
| NBFR | BALT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.62 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 5.71 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 21.02 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NBFR vs. BALT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NBFR drawdown since its inception was -8.49%, which is greater than BALT's maximum drawdown of -4.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBFR and BALT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NBFR | BALT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.49% | -4.89% | -3.60% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -1.15% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -4.89% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -4.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.58% | 0.00% | -4.58% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.05% | -0.34% | -1.71% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.31% | — |
Volatility
NBFR vs. BALT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NBFR | BALT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.80% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 1.49% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.83% | 2.27% | +14.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.83% | 3.30% | +13.53% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.83% | 3.28% | +13.55% |
NBFR vs. BALT - Expense Ratio Comparison
NBFR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than BALT's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
NBFR vs. BALT - Dividend Comparison
NBFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, while BALT has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
BALT Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF | 0.00% |
NBFR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed 10 Buffer ETF | 0.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NBFR and BALT have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BALT is cheaper at 0.69% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BALT is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for NBFR.
NBFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.02%, compared with 0.00% for BALT.
Their fees differ too: 0.79% for NBFR and 0.69% for BALT.
Find the right allocation for NBFR and BALT
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