NBFR vs. CPRA
NBFR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed 10 Buffer ETF) and CPRA (Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.70 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NBFR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CPRA.
Performance
NBFR vs. CPRA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
NBFR
- 1D
- 0.95%
- 1M
- -1.80%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
CPRA
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- 6M
- 3.95%
- YTD
- 4.58%
- 1Y
- 8.87%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 8.76%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $23.06K | $26.22K | $32.24K | |
| $83.82K | $58.88K | $223.65K |
NBFR vs. CPRA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
NBFR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed 10 Buffer ETF | 3.36% |
CPRA Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | 3.68% |
Correlation
The correlation between NBFR and CPRA is 0.70, 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 | 0.70 |
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. CPRA — Risk / Return Rank
NBFR
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CPRA
NBFR vs. CPRA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed 10 Buffer ETF (NBFR) and Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA). 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 | CPRA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.95 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 9.57 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 54.79 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
NBFR vs. CPRA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum NBFR drawdown since its inception was -8.49%, which is greater than CPRA's maximum drawdown of -1.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBFR and CPRA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| NBFR | CPRA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.49% | -1.69% | -6.80% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.58% | -0.02% | -4.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.05% | -0.14% | -1.91% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.16% | — |
Volatility
NBFR vs. CPRA - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| NBFR | CPRA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.44% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 1.36% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.83% | 2.16% | +14.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.83% | 2.71% | +14.12% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.83% | 2.71% | +14.12% |
NBFR vs. CPRA - Expense Ratio Comparison
NBFR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CPRA's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
NBFR vs. CPRA - Dividend Comparison
NBFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, while CPRA has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM |
|---|---|
CPRA Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | 0.00% |
NBFR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed 10 Buffer ETF | 0.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
NBFR and CPRA have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CPRA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CPRA 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 CPRA.
They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for NBFR and 0.69% for CPRA.
Find the right allocation for NBFR and CPRA
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