QTAP vs. BULZ

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

QTAP (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April) and BULZ (MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN) are both Leveraged Equities funds. QTAP is actively managed, while BULZ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QTAP returned 21.09%/yr vs 100.25%/yr for BULZ. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QTAP charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BULZ.

Performance

QTAP vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) and MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QTAP achieves a 14.58% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 92.22% return.

QTAP

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: 2.33%
• YTD: 14.58%
• 6M: 15.43%
• 1Y: 25.33%
• 3Y*: 21.09%
• 5Y*: 13.77%
• 10Y*: —

BULZ

• 1D: -4.32%
• 1M: 33.43%
• YTD: 92.22%
• 6M: 82.15%
• 1Y: 239.73%
• 3Y*: 100.25%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QTAP vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QTAP Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April	14.58%	19.36%	17.34%	43.32%	-25.87%	5.77%
BULZ MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN	92.22%	60.09%	54.09%	394.22%	-92.26%	12.62%

Correlation

The correlation between QTAP and BULZ is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 19, 2021	0.87

The correlation between QTAP and BULZ shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (1 year) to 0.87 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QTAP vs. BULZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QTAP	BULZ
Technology	50.7%	62.3%
Communication Services	15.8%	25.0%
Consumer Cyclical	12.5%	12.8%
Consumer Defensive	8.7%	-
Healthcare	5.1%	-
Industrials	3.3%	-
Utilities	1.6%	-
Basic Materials	1.3%	-
Energy	0.7%	-
Financial Services	0.2%	-
Real Estate	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

QTAP vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTAP

QTAP Risk / Return Rank: 98
QTAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
QTAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
QTAP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
QTAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
QTAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

BULZ

BULZ Risk / Return Rank: 75
BULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
BULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
BULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 68
BULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
BULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

QTAP vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) and MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ). 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.

	QTAP	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.57	3.24	+1.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	8.42	3.01	+5.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.21	1.40	+0.81
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	15.04	4.45	+10.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	79.40	11.93	+67.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QTAP vs. BULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTAP Sharpe Ratio is 4.57, which is higher than the BULZ Sharpe Ratio of 3.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTAP and BULZ, 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

	QTAP	BULZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.57	3.24	+1.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.73	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.75	0.18	+0.57

Drawdowns

QTAP vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTAP drawdown since its inception was -29.44%, smaller than the maximum BULZ drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTAP and BULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTAP	BULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.44%	-94.44%	+65.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.69%	-54.22%	+52.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.03%	-67.96%	+54.93%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.44%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.18%	-9.44%	+9.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.03%	-58.38%	+53.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.32%	20.20%	-19.88%

Volatility

QTAP vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) is 1.30%, while MicroSectors Solactive FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETN (BULZ) has a volatility of 22.83%. This indicates that QTAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BULZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QTAP	BULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.30%	22.83%	-21.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.98%	56.98%	-53.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.56%	74.46%	-68.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.88%	91.22%	-72.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.77%	91.22%	-72.45%

QTAP vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QTAP has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than BULZ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

QTAP vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison

Neither QTAP nor BULZ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTAP and BULZ in my portfolio?

QTAP and BULZ have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QTAP or BULZ?

BULZ has higher volatility (22.83%) compared to QTAP (1.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTAP dropped -29.44% vs BULZ's -94.44%.

Which ETF is better, QTAP or BULZ?

On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 100.25% vs 21.09% for QTAP. On fees, QTAP is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTAP has been the lower-risk option at 1.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QTAP or BULZ?

Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 100.25% return vs 21.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTAP or BULZ?

QTAP is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BULZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QTAP or BULZ?

QTAP and BULZ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QTAP and BULZ?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QTAP and 0.95% for BULZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.57 vs 3.24), 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.