QTJA vs. XAPR
QTJA (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January) and XAPR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QTJA returned 26.02% vs 8.79% for XAPR. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. QTJA charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for XAPR.
Performance
QTJA vs. XAPR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QTJA achieves a 10.75% return, which is significantly higher than XAPR's 3.39% return.
QTJA
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 3.73%
- YTD
- 10.75%
- 6M
- 11.53%
- 1Y
- 26.02%
- 3Y*
- 18.10%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XAPR
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 1.66%
- YTD
- 3.39%
- 6M
- 4.05%
- 1Y
- 8.79%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QTJA vs. XAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
QTJA Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January | 10.75% | 18.86% | 15.31% |
XAPR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April | 3.39% | 12.57% | 8.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between QTJA and XAPR is 0.73, 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 | 0.73 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2024 | 0.78 |
The correlation between QTJA and XAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
QTJA vs. XAPR — Risk / Return Rank
QTJA
XAPR
QTJA vs. XAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April (XAPR). 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 | XAPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.87 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.85 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 2.06 | -0.54 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.68 | 13.37 | -10.69 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.08 | 70.60 | -56.51 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QTJA | XAPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.44 | 4.31 | -1.87 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.28 | 1.88 | -1.60 |
Drawdowns
QTJA vs. XAPR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QTJA drawdown since its inception was -36.07%, which is greater than XAPR's maximum drawdown of -6.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTJA and XAPR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QTJA | XAPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.07% | -6.18% | -29.89% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.75% | -0.66% | -9.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -21.73% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.04% | -0.16% | +0.12% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.29% | -0.18% | -13.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.85% | 0.12% | +1.73% |
Volatility
QTJA vs. XAPR - Volatility Comparison
Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) has a higher volatility of 1.57% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April (XAPR) at 0.75%. This indicates that QTJA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QTJA | XAPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.57% | 0.75% | +0.82% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.42% | 1.31% | +8.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.72% | 2.05% | +8.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.45% | 6.18% | +14.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.45% | 6.18% | +14.27% |
QTJA vs. XAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison
QTJA has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than XAPR's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
QTJA vs. XAPR - Dividend Comparison
Neither QTJA nor XAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
QTJA and XAPR have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QTJA has higher volatility (1.57%) compared to XAPR (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTJA dropped -36.07% vs XAPR's -6.18%.
On 1-year performance, QTJA leads with 26.02% vs 8.79% for XAPR. On fees, QTJA is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, XAPR has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QTJA has performed better with a 26.02% return vs 8.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QTJA is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XAPR.
QTJA and XAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Innovator and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QTJA and 0.85% for XAPR.
XAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.31 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.
Find the right allocation for QTJA and XAPR
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer