PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PMAR vs. ALLW
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PMAR vs. ALLW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR) and SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMAR achieves a 6.36% return, which is significantly lower than ALLW's 10.04% return.


PMAR

1D
0.06%
1M
1.94%
YTD
6.36%
6M
7.38%
1Y
15.93%
3Y*
13.05%
5Y*
9.61%
10Y*

ALLW

1D
0.36%
1M
1.24%
YTD
10.04%
6M
9.83%
1Y
24.48%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PMAR vs. ALLW - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between PMAR and ALLW is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.48

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2025

0.49

PMAR vs. ALLW - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PMAR
ALLW

Technology

36.2%
26.3%

Financial Services

11.9%
15.8%

Communication Services

10.9%
9.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
11.0%

Healthcare

8.4%
8.2%

Industrials

8.1%
9.2%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
5.9%

Energy

3.5%
4.9%

Utilities

2.3%
2.8%

Real Estate

1.9%
1.8%

Basic Materials

1.8%
4.6%

Technology

PMAR
36.2%
ALLW
26.3%

Financial Services

PMAR
11.9%
ALLW
15.8%

Communication Services

PMAR
10.9%
ALLW
9.7%

Consumer Cyclical

PMAR
10.1%
ALLW
11.0%

Healthcare

PMAR
8.4%
ALLW
8.2%

Industrials

PMAR
8.1%
ALLW
9.2%

Consumer Defensive

PMAR
4.9%
ALLW
5.9%

Energy

PMAR
3.5%
ALLW
4.9%

Utilities

PMAR
2.3%
ALLW
2.8%

Real Estate

PMAR
1.9%
ALLW
1.8%

Basic Materials

PMAR
1.8%
ALLW
4.6%

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

PMAR vs. ALLW — Risk / Return Rank

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

PMAR
PMAR Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
PMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
PMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

ALLW
ALLW Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
ALLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ALLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
ALLW Omega Ratio Rank: 7070
Omega Ratio Rank
ALLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
ALLW Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PMAR vs. ALLW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR) and SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). 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.


PMARALLWDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.01

2.34

+0.67

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.52

3.15

+1.38

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.69

1.43

+0.26

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.90

3.47

+0.43

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

23.14

14.77

+8.37

PMAR vs. ALLW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.01, which is comparable to the ALLW Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMAR and ALLW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PMARALLWDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.01

2.34

+0.67

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.92

1.68

-0.77

Drawdowns

PMAR vs. ALLW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMAR drawdown since its inception was -17.18%, which is greater than ALLW's maximum drawdown of -8.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMAR and ALLW.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PMARALLWDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.18%

-8.78%

-8.40%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.11%

-7.23%

+3.12%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.32%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-10.84%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.03%

+0.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.56%

-1.20%

-0.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.69%

1.70%

-1.01%

Volatility

PMAR vs. ALLW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March (PMAR) is 0.83%, while SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) has a volatility of 3.36%. This indicates that PMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ALLW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PMARALLWDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.83%

3.36%

-2.53%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.14%

8.69%

-4.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.31%

10.50%

-5.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.17%

12.54%

-4.37%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.73%

12.54%

-1.81%

PMAR vs. ALLW - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than ALLW's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

PMAR vs. ALLW - Dividend Comparison

PMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ALLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.25%.


Frequently Asked Questions


PMAR and ALLW have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ALLW has higher volatility (3.36%) compared to PMAR (0.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMAR dropped -17.18% vs ALLW's -8.78%.

On 1-year performance, ALLW leads with 24.48% vs 15.93% for PMAR. On fees, PMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, PMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, ALLW has performed better with a 24.48% return vs 15.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for ALLW.

ALLW has the higher dividend yield at 4.25%, compared with 0.00% for PMAR.

PMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while ALLW is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for PMAR and 0.85% for ALLW.

PMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 vs 2.34), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PMAR and ALLW

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