QTAP vs. UMI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QTAP (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April) and UMI (USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QTAP is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Innovator, while UMI is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Wainwright, Inc.. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, QTAP returned 12.65%/yr vs 20.61%/yr for UMI. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QTAP charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for UMI.

Performance

QTAP vs. UMI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QTAP achieves a 12.83% return, which is significantly lower than UMI's 23.69% return.

QTAP

• 1D: -1.14%
• 1M: -0.91%
• YTD: 12.83%
• 6M: 13.01%
• 1Y: 22.41%
• 3Y*: 19.78%
• 5Y*: 12.65%
• 10Y*: —

UMI

• 1D: 1.58%
• 1M: -3.77%
• YTD: 23.69%
• 6M: 23.28%
• 1Y: 27.27%
• 3Y*: 28.51%
• 5Y*: 20.61%
• 10Y*: —

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

QTAP vs. UMI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QTAP Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April	12.83%	19.36%	17.34%	43.32%	-25.87%	15.95%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	23.69%	5.11%	42.97%	14.60%	20.78%	18.37%

Correlation

The correlation between QTAP and UMI is -0.14, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.14
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.16
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2021	0.30

The correlation between QTAP and UMI shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to 0.30 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QTAP vs. UMI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QTAP	UMI
Technology	50.7%	-
Communication Services	15.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	12.5%	-
Consumer Defensive	8.7%	-
Healthcare	5.1%	-
Industrials	3.3%	-
Utilities	1.6%	1.0%
Basic Materials	1.3%	-
Energy	0.7%	99.0%
Financial Services	0.2%	-
Real Estate	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

QTAP vs. UMI — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTAP

QTAP Risk / Return Rank: 97
QTAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
QTAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
QTAP Omega Ratio Rank: 97
QTAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
QTAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

UMI

UMI Risk / Return Rank: 62
UMI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
UMI Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
UMI Omega Ratio Rank: 56
UMI Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
UMI Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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. UMI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) and USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI). 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.

	QTAP	UMI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.70	1.92	+1.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.02	2.64	+3.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.94	1.33	+0.61
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.04	3.65	+5.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	52.85	9.41	+43.43

QTAP vs. UMI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTAP Sharpe Ratio is 3.70, which is higher than the UMI Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTAP and UMI, 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

QTAP vs. UMI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTAP drawdown since its inception was -29.44%, smaller than the maximum UMI drawdown of -48.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTAP and UMI.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTAP	UMI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.44%	-48.08%	+18.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.49%	-7.50%	+5.01%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.03%	-17.08%	+4.05%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.44%	-20.05%	-9.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.70%	-3.85%	+2.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.99%	-6.58%	+1.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.43%	2.90%	-2.47%

Volatility

QTAP vs. UMI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April (QTAP) is 3.03%, while USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF (UMI) has a volatility of 5.61%. This indicates that QTAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than UMI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QTAP	UMI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.03%	5.61%	-2.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.94%	11.10%	-6.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.12%	14.28%	-8.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.92%	19.46%	-0.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.72%	23.16%	-4.44%

QTAP vs. UMI - Expense Ratio Comparison

QTAP has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than UMI's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

QTAP vs. UMI - Dividend Comparison

QTAP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while UMI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.93%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QTAP Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
UMI USCF Midstream Energy Income Fund ETF	5.93%	6.23%	4.39%	4.67%	4.36%	3.00%	2.18%	2.47%	2.48%	0.15%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTAP and UMI in my portfolio?

QTAP and UMI have a correlation of -0.14, 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 UMI?

UMI has higher volatility (5.61%) compared to QTAP (3.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTAP dropped -29.44% vs UMI's -48.08%.

Which ETF is better, QTAP or UMI?

On 5-year performance, UMI leads with 20.61% vs 12.65% for QTAP. On fees, QTAP is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QTAP has been the lower-risk option at 3.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QTAP or UMI?

Over the 5-year period, UMI has performed better with a 20.61% return vs 12.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTAP or UMI?

QTAP is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for UMI.

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

UMI has the higher dividend yield at 5.93%, compared with 0.00% for QTAP.

What is the main difference between QTAP and UMI?

QTAP is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while UMI is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Wainwright, Inc.. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QTAP and 0.85% for UMI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QTAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.70 vs 1.92), 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.