NNOV vs. KMAR

Last updated Jul 22, 2026

NNOV (Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - November) and KMAR (Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. NNOV is actively managed, while KMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, NNOV returned 12.91% vs 22.30% for KMAR. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

NNOV vs. KMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - November (NNOV) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NNOV achieves a 8.95% return, which is significantly lower than KMAR's 12.40% return.

NNOV

• 1D: 0.94%
• 1M: -0.41%
• 6M: 9.57%
• YTD: 8.95%
• 1Y: 12.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.69%

KMAR

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: 1.04%
• 6M: 9.73%
• YTD: 12.40%
• 1Y: 22.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.70%

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

NNOV vs. KMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NNOV Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - November	8.95%	10.56%
KMAR Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March	12.40%	11.45%

Correlation

The correlation between NNOV and KMAR is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2025	0.73

The correlation between NNOV and KMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NNOV vs. KMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NNOV

NNOV Risk / Return Rank: 60
NNOV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
NNOV Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
NNOV Omega Ratio Rank: 64
NNOV Calmar Ratio Rank: 50
NNOV Martin Ratio Rank: 63

KMAR

KMAR Risk / Return Rank: 92
KMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
KMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
KMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 91
KMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
KMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

NNOV vs. KMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - November (NNOV) and Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR). 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.

	NNOV	KMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	2.43	-0.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.20	3.58	-1.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.46	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.93	4.58	-2.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.30	18.81	-10.50

NNOV vs. KMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NNOV Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is lower than the KMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NNOV and KMAR, 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

NNOV vs. KMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NNOV drawdown since its inception was -12.80%, which is greater than KMAR's maximum drawdown of -11.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NNOV and KMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	NNOV	KMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.80%	-11.32%	-1.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.70%	-4.89%	-1.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.59%	0.00%	-0.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.37%	-1.28%	-0.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.56%	1.19%	+0.37%

Volatility

NNOV vs. KMAR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - November (NNOV) has a higher volatility of 2.62% compared to Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March (KMAR) at 1.47%. This indicates that NNOV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NNOV	KMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.62%	1.47%	+1.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.26%	6.72%	+0.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.47%	9.22%	-0.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.48%	11.88%	-0.40%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.48%	11.88%	-0.40%

NNOV vs. KMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NNOV and KMAR have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

NNOV vs. KMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither NNOV nor KMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NNOV and KMAR in my portfolio?

NNOV and KMAR have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NNOV or KMAR?

NNOV has higher volatility (2.62%) compared to KMAR (1.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NNOV dropped -12.80% vs KMAR's -11.32%.

Which ETF is better, NNOV or KMAR?

On 1-year performance, KMAR leads with 22.30% vs 12.91% for NNOV. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, KMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NNOV or KMAR?

Over the 1-year period, KMAR has performed better with a 22.30% return vs 12.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NNOV or KMAR?

NNOV and KMAR have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NNOV or KMAR?

NNOV and KMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 1.53), 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.