SGLC vs. UNOV

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

SGLC (SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF) and UNOV (Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - November) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. SGLC is actively managed, while UNOV is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SGLC returned 21.04%/yr vs 9.51%/yr for UNOV. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SGLC charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for UNOV.

Performance

SGLC vs. UNOV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (SGLC) and Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - November (UNOV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SGLC achieves a 11.78% return, which is significantly higher than UNOV's 4.77% return.

SGLC

• 1D: -1.10%
• 1M: -0.20%
• YTD: 11.78%
• 6M: 10.85%
• 1Y: 30.46%
• 3Y*: 21.04%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UNOV

• 1D: -0.57%
• 1M: -0.11%
• YTD: 4.77%
• 6M: 4.37%
• 1Y: 12.18%
• 3Y*: 9.51%
• 5Y*: 6.49%
• 10Y*: —

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

SGLC vs. UNOV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SGLC SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF	11.78%	17.30%	20.19%	19.30%
UNOV Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - November	4.77%	9.92%	9.42%	10.10%

Correlation

The correlation between SGLC and UNOV 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	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2023	0.84

The correlation between SGLC and UNOV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

SGLC vs. UNOV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SGLC	UNOV
Technology	32.4%	38.4%
Financial Services	14.9%	11.0%
Communication Services	11.2%	10.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.0%
Healthcare	9.9%	8.4%
Industrials	6.5%	7.9%
Consumer Defensive	5.4%	4.6%
Basic Materials	3.1%	1.7%
Energy	2.9%	3.2%
Real Estate	2.5%	1.8%
Utilities	1.2%	2.1%

Return for Risk

SGLC vs. UNOV — Risk / Return Rank

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

SGLC

SGLC Risk / Return Rank: 73
SGLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
SGLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
SGLC Omega Ratio Rank: 73
SGLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
SGLC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

UNOV

UNOV Risk / Return Rank: 72
UNOV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
UNOV Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
UNOV Omega Ratio Rank: 78
UNOV Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
UNOV Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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.

SGLC vs. UNOV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (SGLC) and Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - November (UNOV). 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.

	SGLC	UNOV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.18	2.12	+0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.88	3.03	-0.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.42	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.16	2.70	+0.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.73	12.94	+0.79

SGLC vs. UNOV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SGLC Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is comparable to the UNOV Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SGLC and UNOV, 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

SGLC vs. UNOV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SGLC drawdown since its inception was -20.24%, which is greater than UNOV's maximum drawdown of -13.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLC and UNOV.

Drawdown Indicators

	SGLC	UNOV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.24%	-13.84%	-6.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.67%	-4.52%	-5.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.24%	-9.10%	-11.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-9.10%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.75%	-0.83%	-1.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.45%	-1.65%	-0.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.22%	0.94%	+1.28%

Volatility

SGLC vs. UNOV - Volatility Comparison

SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (SGLC) has a higher volatility of 4.91% compared to Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - November (UNOV) at 2.03%. This indicates that SGLC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UNOV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SGLC	UNOV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.91%	2.03%	+2.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.69%	4.97%	+6.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.05%	5.80%	+8.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.10%	6.88%	+9.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.10%	7.72%	+8.38%

SGLC vs. UNOV - Expense Ratio Comparison

SGLC has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than UNOV's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

SGLC vs. UNOV - Dividend Comparison

SGLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.21%, while UNOV has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
SGLC SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF	0.21%	0.23%	8.68%	1.49%
UNOV Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - November	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SGLC and UNOV in my portfolio?

SGLC and UNOV 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, SGLC or UNOV?

SGLC has higher volatility (4.91%) compared to UNOV (2.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SGLC dropped -20.24% vs UNOV's -13.84%.

Which ETF is better, SGLC or UNOV?

On 3-year performance, SGLC leads with 21.04% vs 9.51% for UNOV. On fees, UNOV is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, UNOV has been the lower-risk option at 2.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SGLC or UNOV?

Over the 3-year period, SGLC has performed better with a 21.04% return vs 9.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SGLC or UNOV?

UNOV is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for SGLC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SGLC or UNOV?

SGLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.21%, compared with 0.00% for UNOV.

What is the main difference between SGLC and UNOV?

They also come from different issuers: Summit Global Investments and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for SGLC and 0.79% for UNOV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SGLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.18 vs 2.12), 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.