QHDG vs. BUFF

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

QHDG (Innovator Hedged Nasdaq-100 ETF) and BUFF (Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QHDG is a Equity Hedged fund actively managed by Innovator, while BUFF is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Refinitiv Laddered Power Buffer Strategy Index. QHDG is actively managed, while BUFF is passively managed. Over the past year, QHDG returned 11.96% vs 14.36% for BUFF. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QHDG charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for BUFF.

Performance

QHDG vs. BUFF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Hedged Nasdaq-100 ETF (QHDG) and Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF (BUFF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QHDG achieves a 1.06% return, which is significantly lower than BUFF's 5.42% return.

QHDG

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.89%
• YTD: 1.06%
• 6M: 0.45%
• 1Y: 11.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFF

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 1.68%
• YTD: 5.42%
• 6M: 5.90%
• 1Y: 14.36%
• 3Y*: 12.47%
• 5Y*: 8.71%
• 10Y*: —

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

QHDG vs. BUFF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QHDG Innovator Hedged Nasdaq-100 ETF	1.06%	12.13%	6.35%
BUFF Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF	5.42%	11.02%	3.22%

Correlation

The correlation between QHDG and BUFF is 0.76, 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	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2024	0.81

The correlation between QHDG and BUFF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

QHDG vs. BUFF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QHDG	BUFF
Technology	53.8%	36.2%
Communication Services	15.8%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	12.3%	10.1%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	4.9%
Healthcare	4.2%	8.4%
Industrials	2.8%	8.1%
Utilities	1.4%	2.3%
Basic Materials	1.1%	1.8%
Energy	0.6%	3.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	11.9%
Real Estate	0.1%	1.9%

Return for Risk

QHDG vs. BUFF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QHDG

QHDG Risk / Return Rank: 37
QHDG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
QHDG Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
QHDG Omega Ratio Rank: 40
QHDG Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
QHDG Martin Ratio Rank: 37

BUFF

BUFF Risk / Return Rank: 86
BUFF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BUFF Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
BUFF Omega Ratio Rank: 89
BUFF Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
BUFF Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

QHDG vs. BUFF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Hedged Nasdaq-100 ETF (QHDG) and Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF (BUFF). 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.

	QHDG	BUFF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.37	2.80	-1.44
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	4.24	-2.38
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.58	-0.31
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.74	4.02	-2.28
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.97	21.50	-15.53
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QHDG vs. BUFF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QHDG Sharpe Ratio is 1.37, which is lower than the BUFF Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QHDG and BUFF, 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

	QHDG	BUFF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.37	2.80	-1.44
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	1.04	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.89	0.49	+0.40

Drawdowns

QHDG vs. BUFF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QHDG drawdown since its inception was -15.29%, smaller than the maximum BUFF drawdown of -46.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QHDG and BUFF.

Drawdown Indicators

	QHDG	BUFF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.29%	-46.23%	+30.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.00%	-3.58%	-3.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.24%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-10.24%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-0.27%	-0.70%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.15%	-6.18%	+4.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	0.67%	+1.37%

Volatility

QHDG vs. BUFF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Hedged Nasdaq-100 ETF (QHDG) is 0.26%, while Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF (BUFF) has a volatility of 1.02%. This indicates that QHDG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QHDG	BUFF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.26%	1.02%	-0.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.55%	3.83%	+2.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.79%	5.15%	+3.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.46%	8.41%	+4.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.46%	17.67%	-5.21%

QHDG vs. BUFF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QHDG has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFF's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

QHDG vs. BUFF - Dividend Comparison

Neither QHDG nor BUFF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BUFF Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.78%	1.26%	1.74%	1.55%	0.18%
QHDG Innovator Hedged Nasdaq-100 ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QHDG and BUFF in my portfolio?

QHDG and BUFF have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QHDG or BUFF?

BUFF has higher volatility (1.02%) compared to QHDG (0.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QHDG dropped -15.29% vs BUFF's -46.23%.

Which ETF is better, QHDG or BUFF?

On 1-year performance, BUFF leads with 14.36% vs 11.96% for QHDG. On fees, QHDG is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QHDG has been the lower-risk option at 0.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QHDG or BUFF?

Over the 1-year period, BUFF has performed better with a 14.36% return vs 11.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QHDG or BUFF?

QHDG is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for BUFF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QHDG or BUFF?

QHDG and BUFF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QHDG and BUFF?

QHDG is categorized as Equity Hedged, while BUFF is Defined Outcome. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QHDG and 0.89% for BUFF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 1.37), 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.