NMAR vs. CAOS

Last updated Jul 22, 2026

NMAR (Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NMAR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. NMAR is passively managed, while CAOS is actively managed. Over the past year, NMAR returned 15.05% vs 1.98% for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.38, they often move in opposite directions. NMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

NMAR vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March (NMAR) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NMAR achieves a 8.80% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.95% return.

NMAR

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: -0.26%
• 6M: 8.86%
• YTD: 8.80%
• 1Y: 15.05%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.21%

CAOS

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.30%
• 6M: 0.18%
• YTD: 0.95%
• 1Y: 1.98%
• 3Y*: 3.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.80%

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

NMAR vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NMAR Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March	8.80%	11.79%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.95%	2.27%

Correlation

The correlation between NMAR and CAOS is -0.38, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2025	-0.38

Return for Risk

NMAR vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

NMAR

NMAR Risk / Return Rank: 90
NMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
NMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
NMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 91
NMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
NMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 56
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 56
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

NMAR vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March (NMAR) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	NMAR	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.26	1.27	+0.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.32	2.03	+1.29
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.26	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.46	2.62	+0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.44	5.89	+14.55

NMAR vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NMAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.26, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NMAR and CAOS, 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

NMAR vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NMAR drawdown since its inception was -10.61%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NMAR and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	NMAR	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.61%	-3.89%	-6.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.37%	-0.76%	-3.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.52%	-0.95%	+0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.87%	-0.92%	+0.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.74%	0.34%	+0.40%

Volatility

NMAR vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March (NMAR) has a higher volatility of 2.00% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.54%. This indicates that NMAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NMAR	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.00%	0.54%	+1.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.77%	1.11%	+4.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.68%	1.56%	+5.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.02%	4.19%	+6.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.02%	4.19%	+6.83%

NMAR vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

NMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

NMAR vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

Neither NMAR nor CAOS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NMAR and CAOS in my portfolio?

NMAR and CAOS have a correlation of -0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NMAR or CAOS?

NMAR has higher volatility (2.00%) compared to CAOS (0.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NMAR dropped -10.61% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, NMAR or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, NMAR leads with 15.05% vs 1.98% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NMAR or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, NMAR has performed better with a 15.05% return vs 1.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NMAR or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for NMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NMAR or CAOS?

NMAR and CAOS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between NMAR and CAOS?

NMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for NMAR and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.27), 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.