NMAR vs. MMAX

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

NMAR (Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March) and MMAX (iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. NMAR is passively managed, while MMAX is actively managed. Over the past year, NMAR returned 19.84% vs 7.89% for MMAX. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for MMAX.

Performance

NMAR vs. MMAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March (NMAR) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NMAR achieves a 9.27% return, which is significantly higher than MMAX's 3.22% return.

NMAR

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 2.43%
• YTD: 9.27%
• 6M: 10.30%
• 1Y: 19.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MMAX

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.63%
• YTD: 3.22%
• 6M: 3.95%
• 1Y: 7.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NMAR vs. MMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NMAR Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March	9.27%	15.96%
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	3.22%	5.88%

Correlation

The correlation between NMAR and MMAX is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025	0.66

The correlation between NMAR and MMAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NMAR vs. MMAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

NMAR

NMAR Risk / Return Rank: 92
NMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
NMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
NMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 94
NMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
NMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

MMAX

MMAX Risk / Return Rank: 99
MMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
MMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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. MMAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March (NMAR) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). 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.

	NMAR	MMAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.22	5.72	-2.50
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.84	11.05	-6.21
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.71	2.60	-0.89
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.70	23.34	-18.64
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	30.70	117.80	-87.11
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NMAR vs. MMAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.22, which is lower than the MMAX Sharpe Ratio of 5.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NMAR and MMAX, 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

	NMAR	MMAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.22	5.72	-2.50
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.70	3.19	-1.49

Drawdowns

NMAR vs. MMAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NMAR drawdown since its inception was -9.99%, which is greater than MMAX's maximum drawdown of -1.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NMAR and MMAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	NMAR	MMAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.99%	-1.93%	-8.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.37%	-0.34%	-4.03%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.09%	0.00%	-0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.78%	-0.10%	-0.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.67%	0.07%	+0.60%

Volatility

NMAR vs. MMAX - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March (NMAR) has a higher volatility of 0.93% compared to iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX) at 0.35%. This indicates that NMAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MMAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NMAR	MMAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.93%	0.35%	+0.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.98%	0.95%	+4.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.20%	1.39%	+4.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.16%	2.49%	+8.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.16%	2.49%	+8.67%

NMAR vs. MMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

NMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than MMAX's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

NMAR vs. MMAX - Dividend Comparison

NMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MMAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%.

Position	TTM	2025
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	1.27%	1.31%
NMAR Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NMAR and MMAX in my portfolio?

NMAR and MMAX have a correlation of 0.64, 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 MMAX?

NMAR has higher volatility (0.93%) compared to MMAX (0.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NMAR dropped -9.99% vs MMAX's -1.93%.

Which ETF is better, NMAR or MMAX?

On 1-year performance, NMAR leads with 19.84% vs 7.89% for MMAX. On fees, MMAX is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, MMAX has been the lower-risk option at 0.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NMAR or MMAX?

Over the 1-year period, NMAR has performed better with a 19.84% return vs 7.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NMAR or MMAX?

MMAX is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for NMAR.

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

MMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.00% for NMAR.

What is the main difference between NMAR and MMAX?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for NMAR and 0.50% for MMAX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MMAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.72 vs 3.22), 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.