RB vs. EAPR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

RB (ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) and EAPR (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds - RB tracks the Russell 2000 while EAPR tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets. Both are passively managed. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RB charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EAPR.

Performance

RB vs. EAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RB achieves a 6.76% return, which is significantly lower than EAPR's 11.39% return.

RB

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 1.63%
• YTD: 6.76%
• 6M: 8.48%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EAPR

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 2.01%
• YTD: 11.39%
• 6M: 12.25%
• 1Y: 22.07%
• 3Y*: 10.62%
• 5Y*: 5.15%
• 10Y*: —

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

RB vs. EAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	6.76%	10.58%
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	11.39%	6.12%

Correlation

The correlation between RB and EAPR is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2025	0.43

Return for Risk

RB vs. EAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EAPR

EAPR Risk / Return Rank: 94
EAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
EAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
EAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
EAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

RB vs. EAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	RB	EAPR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	3.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.15	0.54	+2.60

Drawdowns

RB vs. EAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RB drawdown since its inception was -1.70%, smaller than the maximum EAPR drawdown of -17.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RB and EAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	RB	EAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.70%	-17.65%	+15.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-3.02%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.24%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.65%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.47%	-0.45%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.41%	-4.06%	+3.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.52%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	RB	EAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.79%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	6.28%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.21%	7.24%	-1.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.21%	10.09%	-3.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.21%	10.02%	-3.81%

RB vs. EAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

RB has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than EAPR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

RB vs. EAPR - Dividend Comparison

RB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.00%, while EAPR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	2.00%	1.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RB and EAPR in my portfolio?

RB and EAPR have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, RB or EAPR?

On fees, RB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, RB or EAPR?

RB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RB or EAPR?

RB has the higher dividend yield at 2.00%, compared with 0.00% for EAPR.

What is the main difference between RB and EAPR?

RB tracks Russell 2000, while EAPR tracks MSCI Emerging Markets. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RB and 0.89% for EAPR.