TBJL vs. EAPR

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

TBJL (Innovator 20+ Year Treasury Bond Buffer ETF – July) and EAPR (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator - TBJL tracks the iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF while EAPR tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, TBJL returned -4.28%/yr vs 5.26%/yr for EAPR. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TBJL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EAPR.

Performance

TBJL vs. EAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator 20+ Year Treasury Bond Buffer ETF – July (TBJL) 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, TBJL achieves a -3.24% return, which is significantly lower than EAPR's 10.08% return.

TBJL

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: -2.73%
• 6M: -3.50%
• YTD: -3.24%
• 1Y: -0.94%
• 3Y*: -1.08%
• 5Y*: -4.28%
• 10Y*: —

EAPR

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: 0.11%
• 6M: 9.37%
• YTD: 10.08%
• 1Y: 16.69%
• 3Y*: 9.77%
• 5Y*: 5.26%
• 10Y*: —

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

TBJL vs. EAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
TBJL Innovator 20+ Year Treasury Bond Buffer ETF – July	-3.24%	1.74%	-3.16%	4.12%	-20.82%	8.62%
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	10.08%	14.80%	2.86%	8.19%	-5.01%	-2.89%

Correlation

The correlation between TBJL and EAPR is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.13
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.10
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2021	0.04

Return for Risk

TBJL vs. EAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBJL

TBJL Risk / Return Rank: 6
TBJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
TBJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
TBJL Omega Ratio Rank: 6
TBJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
TBJL Martin Ratio Rank: 6

EAPR

EAPR Risk / Return Rank: 85
EAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
EAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
EAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 92
EAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
EAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

TBJL vs. EAPR - 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 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.

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	EAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.33	1.88	-2.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.41	2.75	-3.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.95	1.49	-0.54
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.31	4.27	-4.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.72	18.98	-19.70

TBJL vs. EAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TBJL Sharpe Ratio is -0.33, which is lower than the EAPR Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TBJL and EAPR, 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

TBJL vs. EAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBJL drawdown since its inception was -29.36%, which is greater than EAPR's maximum drawdown of -17.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBJL and EAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBJL	EAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.36%	-17.65%	-11.71%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.41%	-3.90%	-2.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.49%	-10.24%	-3.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.57%	-16.53%	-12.04%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-23.15%	-1.96%	-21.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.71%	-4.02%	-11.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.76%	0.88%	+1.88%

Volatility

TBJL vs. EAPR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator 20+ Year Treasury Bond Buffer ETF – July (TBJL) is 2.05%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR) has a volatility of 4.86%. This indicates that TBJL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TBJL	EAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.05%	4.86%	-2.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.57%	8.43%	-4.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.08%	8.88%	-2.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.79%	10.35%	+0.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.61%	10.22%	+0.39%

TBJL vs. EAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBJL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than EAPR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBJL vs. EAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither TBJL nor EAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBJL and EAPR in my portfolio?

TBJL and EAPR have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TBJL or EAPR?

EAPR has higher volatility (4.86%) compared to TBJL (2.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBJL dropped -29.36% vs EAPR's -17.65%.

Which ETF is better, TBJL or EAPR?

On 5-year performance, EAPR leads with 5.26% vs -4.28% for TBJL. On fees, TBJL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, TBJL has been the lower-risk option at 2.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TBJL or EAPR?

Over the 5-year period, EAPR has performed better with a 5.26% return vs -4.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBJL or EAPR?

TBJL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EAPR.

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

TBJL and EAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between TBJL and EAPR?

TBJL tracks iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF, while EAPR tracks MSCI Emerging Markets. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for TBJL and 0.89% for EAPR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 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.