QBUF vs. HEQQ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

QBUF (Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) and HEQQ (JPMorgan Nasdaq Hedged Equity Laddered Overlay ETF) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. QBUF is passively managed, while HEQQ is actively managed. Over the past year, QBUF returned 8.55% vs 11.59% for HEQQ. Their correlation of 0.82 means they have usually moved in the same direction. QBUF charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for HEQQ.

Performance

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) and JPMorgan Nasdaq Hedged Equity Laddered Overlay ETF (HEQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with QBUF having a 2.89% return and HEQQ slightly lower at 2.75%.

QBUF

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: -0.82%
• 6M: 2.14%
• YTD: 2.89%
• 1Y: 8.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.61%

HEQQ

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: -0.71%
• 6M: 1.17%
• YTD: 2.75%
• 1Y: 11.59%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.65%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
HEQQ JPMorgan Nasdaq Hedged Equity Laddered Overlay ETF	$19.72K	$10.59K	$92.03K
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	$858.18K	$1.07M	$961.40K

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	2.89%	11.19%
HEQQ JPMorgan Nasdaq Hedged Equity Laddered Overlay ETF	2.75%	16.96%

Correlation

The correlation between QBUF and HEQQ is 0.87, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2025	0.82

The correlation between QBUF and HEQQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QBUF	HEQQ
Technology	60.2%	59.6%
Communication Services	13.3%	12.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.9%	10.8%
Consumer Defensive	6.5%	5.8%
Healthcare	3.6%	4.4%
Industrials	2.7%	3.0%
Utilities	1.2%	1.6%
Basic Materials	1.0%	0.7%
Energy	0.5%	0.6%
Financial Services	0.2%	0.6%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.2%

Return for Risk

QBUF vs. HEQQ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

QBUF

QBUF Risk / Return Rank: 58
QBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
QBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
QBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 58
QBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
QBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 73

HEQQ

HEQQ Risk / Return Rank: 46
HEQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 47
HEQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
HEQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 47
HEQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
HEQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 46

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) and JPMorgan Nasdaq Hedged Equity Laddered Overlay ETF (HEQQ). 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.

	QBUF	HEQQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.28	1.18	+0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.81	1.73	+0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.22	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.96	1.43	+0.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.14	5.30	+3.84

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QBUF Sharpe Ratio is 1.28, which is comparable to the HEQQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QBUF and HEQQ, 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

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBUF drawdown since its inception was -8.84%, which is greater than HEQQ's maximum drawdown of -7.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBUF and HEQQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	QBUF	HEQQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.84%	-7.64%	-1.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.99%	-7.64%	+3.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.99%	-2.37%	+0.38%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.82%	-1.17%	+0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.85%	2.06%	-1.21%

Volatility

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) is 3.28%, while JPMorgan Nasdaq Hedged Equity Laddered Overlay ETF (HEQQ) has a volatility of 3.93%. This indicates that QBUF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than HEQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QBUF	HEQQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.28%	3.93%	-0.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.57%	7.37%	-2.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.12%	9.28%	-3.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.44%	10.99%	-2.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.44%	10.99%	-2.55%

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QBUF has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than HEQQ's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

QBUF vs. HEQQ - Dividend Comparison

QBUF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while HEQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.22%.

Position	TTM	2025
HEQQ JPMorgan Nasdaq Hedged Equity Laddered Overlay ETF	0.22%	0.19%
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QBUF and HEQQ in my portfolio?

QBUF and HEQQ have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QBUF or HEQQ?

HEQQ has higher volatility (3.93%) compared to QBUF (3.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBUF dropped -8.84% vs HEQQ's -7.64%.

Which ETF is better, QBUF or HEQQ?

On 1-year performance, HEQQ leads with 11.59% vs 8.55% for QBUF. On fees, HEQQ is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QBUF has been the lower-risk option at 3.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QBUF or HEQQ?

Over the 1-year period, HEQQ has performed better with a 11.59% return vs 8.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QBUF or HEQQ?

HEQQ is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBUF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QBUF or HEQQ?

HEQQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.22%, compared with 0.00% for QBUF.

What is the main difference between QBUF and HEQQ?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QBUF and 0.50% for HEQQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QBUF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.28 vs 1.18), 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.