QTJA vs. BAPR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QTJA (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January) and BAPR (Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April) are both exchange-traded funds - QTJA is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator, while BAPR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index April. QTJA is actively managed, while BAPR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QTJA returned 18.10%/yr vs 15.31%/yr for BAPR. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

QTJA vs. BAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) and Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (BAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with QTJA having a 10.75% return and BAPR slightly higher at 10.81%.

QTJA

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 3.73%
• YTD: 10.75%
• 6M: 11.53%
• 1Y: 26.02%
• 3Y*: 18.10%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAPR

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 2.21%
• YTD: 10.81%
• 6M: 11.74%
• 1Y: 20.12%
• 3Y*: 15.31%
• 5Y*: 11.17%
• 10Y*: —

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

QTJA vs. BAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
QTJA Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January	10.75%	18.86%	18.47%	25.56%	-34.58%
BAPR Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April	10.81%	8.28%	15.95%	23.16%	-7.20%

Correlation

The correlation between QTJA and BAPR is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2022	0.86

The correlation between QTJA and BAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

QTJA vs. BAPR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QTJA	BAPR
Technology	54.2%	36.2%
Communication Services	15.5%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	10.1%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	4.9%
Healthcare	4.2%	8.4%
Industrials	2.8%	8.1%
Utilities	1.4%	2.3%
Basic Materials	1.2%	1.8%
Energy	0.6%	3.5%
Financial Services	0.2%	11.9%
Real Estate	0.1%	1.9%

Return for Risk

QTJA vs. BAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTJA

QTJA Risk / Return Rank: 74
QTJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
QTJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
QTJA Omega Ratio Rank: 86
QTJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
QTJA Martin Ratio Rank: 75

BAPR

BAPR Risk / Return Rank: 96
BAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
BAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
BAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
BAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
BAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

QTJA vs. BAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) and Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (BAPR). 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.

	QTJA	BAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.44	3.59	-1.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.46	6.11	-2.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.87	-0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.68	10.46	-7.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.08	57.55	-43.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QTJA vs. BAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.44, which is lower than the BAPR Sharpe Ratio of 3.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTJA and BAPR, 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

	QTJA	BAPR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.44	3.59	-1.15
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.98	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.28	0.84	-0.55

Drawdowns

QTJA vs. BAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTJA drawdown since its inception was -36.07%, which is greater than BAPR's maximum drawdown of -23.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTJA and BAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTJA	BAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.07%	-23.91%	-12.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.75%	-1.93%	-7.82%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.73%	-15.58%	-6.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-15.58%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.04%	-0.23%	+0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.29%	-2.59%	-10.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.85%	0.35%	+1.50%

Volatility

QTJA vs. BAPR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) has a higher volatility of 1.57% compared to Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - April (BAPR) at 1.06%. This indicates that QTJA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QTJA	BAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.57%	1.06%	+0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.42%	4.53%	+4.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.72%	5.64%	+5.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.45%	11.49%	+8.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.45%	13.12%	+7.33%

QTJA vs. BAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QTJA and BAPR have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

QTJA vs. BAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither QTJA nor BAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTJA and BAPR in my portfolio?

QTJA and BAPR have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QTJA or BAPR?

QTJA has higher volatility (1.57%) compared to BAPR (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTJA dropped -36.07% vs BAPR's -23.91%.

Which ETF is better, QTJA or BAPR?

On 3-year performance, QTJA leads with 18.10% vs 15.31% for BAPR. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, BAPR has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QTJA or BAPR?

Over the 3-year period, QTJA has performed better with a 18.10% return vs 15.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTJA or BAPR?

QTJA and BAPR have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QTJA or BAPR?

QTJA and BAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QTJA and BAPR?

QTJA is categorized as Options Trading, while BAPR is Defined Outcome.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.59 vs 2.44), 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.