NJUL vs. KJUL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NJUL (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - July) and KJUL (Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July) are both exchange-traded funds - NJUL is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the Invesco QQQ Trust, while KJUL is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the iShares Russell 2000 ETF. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, NJUL returned 10.86%/yr vs 4.96%/yr for KJUL. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

NJUL vs. KJUL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - July (NJUL) and Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July (KJUL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NJUL achieves a 6.16% return, which is significantly lower than KJUL's 6.64% return.

NJUL

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 1.39%
• YTD: 6.16%
• 6M: 6.40%
• 1Y: 18.75%
• 3Y*: 14.95%
• 5Y*: 10.86%
• 10Y*: —

KJUL

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 1.09%
• YTD: 6.64%
• 6M: 7.81%
• 1Y: 20.14%
• 3Y*: 10.70%
• 5Y*: 4.96%
• 10Y*: —

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

NJUL vs. KJUL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
NJUL Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - July	6.16%	15.67%	13.93%	29.52%	-11.67%	7.86%	8.28%
KJUL Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July	6.64%	7.70%	8.69%	11.78%	-8.44%	2.51%	11.61%

Correlation

The correlation between NJUL and KJUL is 0.66, 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	0.66
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2020	0.67

The correlation between NJUL and KJUL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

NJUL vs. KJUL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	NJUL	KJUL
Technology	54.2%	16.9%
Communication Services	15.5%	2.5%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	2.4%
Healthcare	4.2%	16.5%
Industrials	2.8%	17.5%
Utilities	1.4%	2.9%
Basic Materials	1.2%	4.8%
Energy	0.6%	6.2%
Financial Services	0.2%	15.9%
Real Estate	0.1%	6.2%

Return for Risk

NJUL vs. KJUL — Risk / Return Rank

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

NJUL

NJUL Risk / Return Rank: 80
NJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
NJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
NJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 81
NJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
NJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 88

KJUL

KJUL Risk / Return Rank: 84
KJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
KJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
KJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 80
KJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
KJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

NJUL vs. KJUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - July (NJUL) and Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July (KJUL). 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.

	NJUL	KJUL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.45	2.51	-0.06
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.56	3.75	-0.19
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.49	0.00
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.82	5.84	-2.02
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	19.60	21.64	-2.03
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NJUL vs. KJUL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.45, which is comparable to the KJUL Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NJUL and KJUL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	NJUL	KJUL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.45	2.51	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94	0.41	+0.54
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.01	0.57	+0.44

Drawdowns

NJUL vs. KJUL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NJUL drawdown since its inception was -14.37%, smaller than the maximum KJUL drawdown of -16.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NJUL and KJUL.

Drawdown Indicators

	NJUL	KJUL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.37%	-16.69%	+2.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.93%	-3.42%	-1.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.58%	-14.45%	+0.87%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.37%	-16.69%	+2.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.31%	-4.01%	+1.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.96%	0.92%	+0.04%

Volatility

NJUL vs. KJUL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - July (NJUL) is 0.40%, while Innovator Russell 2000 Power Buffer ETF - July (KJUL) has a volatility of 0.63%. This indicates that NJUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than KJUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NJUL	KJUL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.40%	0.63%	-0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.33%	4.79%	+0.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.71%	8.06%	-0.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.56%	12.31%	-0.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.06%	11.68%	-0.62%

NJUL vs. KJUL - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NJUL and KJUL have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

NJUL vs. KJUL - Dividend Comparison

Neither NJUL nor KJUL has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NJUL and KJUL in my portfolio?

NJUL and KJUL have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NJUL or KJUL?

KJUL has higher volatility (0.63%) compared to NJUL (0.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NJUL dropped -14.37% vs KJUL's -16.69%.

Which ETF is better, NJUL or KJUL?

On 5-year performance, NJUL leads with 10.86% vs 4.96% for KJUL. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, NJUL has been the lower-risk option at 0.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NJUL or KJUL?

Over the 5-year period, NJUL has performed better with a 10.86% return vs 4.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NJUL or KJUL?

NJUL and KJUL have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NJUL or KJUL?

NJUL and KJUL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between NJUL and KJUL?

NJUL is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while KJUL is Defined Outcome. NJUL tracks Invesco QQQ Trust, while KJUL tracks iShares Russell 2000 ETF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KJUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 2.45), 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.