TBJL vs. APXM
TBJL (Innovator 20+ Year Treasury Bond Buffer ETF – July) and APXM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. TBJL is passively managed, while APXM is actively managed. Over the past year, TBJL returned -0.94% vs 4.92% for APXM. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TBJL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for APXM.
Performance
TBJL vs. APXM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TBJL achieves a -3.24% return, which is significantly lower than APXM's 2.40% return.
TBJL
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- -2.73%
- 6M
- -3.50%
- YTD
- -3.24%
- 1Y
- -0.94%
- 3Y*
- -1.08%
- 5Y*
- -4.28%
- 10Y*
- —
APXM
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.52%
- 6M
- 2.24%
- YTD
- 2.40%
- 1Y
- 4.92%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TBJL vs. APXM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TBJL Innovator 20+ Year Treasury Bond Buffer ETF – July | -3.24% | 0.50% |
APXM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April | 2.40% | 5.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between TBJL and APXM is 0.10, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2025 | 0.11 |
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
TBJL vs. APXM — Risk / Return Rank
TBJL
APXM
TBJL vs. APXM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator 20+ Year Treasury Bond Buffer ETF – July (TBJL) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM). 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.
| TBJL | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.90 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 2.09 | -1.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.31 | 8.24 | -8.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.72 | 49.98 | -50.70 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
TBJL vs. APXM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TBJL drawdown since its inception was -29.36%, which is greater than APXM's maximum drawdown of -0.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBJL and APXM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TBJL | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -29.36% | -0.60% | -28.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.41% | -0.60% | -5.81% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.49% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.57% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.15% | 0.00% | -23.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.71% | -0.05% | -15.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.76% | 0.10% | +2.66% |
Volatility
TBJL vs. APXM - Volatility Comparison
Innovator 20+ Year Treasury Bond Buffer ETF – July (TBJL) has a higher volatility of 2.05% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM) at 0.70%. This indicates that TBJL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APXM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TBJL | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.05% | 0.70% | +1.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.57% | 1.10% | +2.47% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.08% | 1.24% | +4.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.79% | 1.36% | +9.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.61% | 1.36% | +9.25% |
TBJL vs. APXM - Expense Ratio Comparison
TBJL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than APXM's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
TBJL vs. APXM - Dividend Comparison
Neither TBJL nor APXM has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
TBJL and APXM have a correlation of 0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TBJL has higher volatility (2.05%) compared to APXM (0.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBJL dropped -29.36% vs APXM's -0.60%.
On 1-year performance, APXM leads with 4.92% vs -0.94% for TBJL. On fees, TBJL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, APXM has been the lower-risk option at 0.70%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, APXM has performed better with a 4.92% return vs -0.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TBJL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for APXM.
TBJL and APXM have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for TBJL and 0.85% for APXM.
APXM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.98 vs -0.33), 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 TBJL and APXM
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