UMAR vs. ALLW

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

UMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March) and ALLW (SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UMAR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while ALLW is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by State Street. UMAR is passively managed, while ALLW is actively managed. Over the past year, UMAR returned 14.89% vs 24.48% for ALLW. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for ALLW.

Performance

UMAR vs. ALLW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March (UMAR) and SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMAR achieves a 5.60% return, which is significantly lower than ALLW's 10.04% return.

UMAR

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 1.38%
• YTD: 5.60%
• 6M: 6.62%
• 1Y: 14.89%
• 3Y*: 12.72%
• 5Y*: 7.82%
• 10Y*: —

ALLW

• 1D: 0.36%
• 1M: 1.24%
• YTD: 10.04%
• 6M: 9.83%
• 1Y: 24.48%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UMAR vs. ALLW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March	5.60%	11.10%
ALLW SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF	10.04%	15.04%

Correlation

The correlation between UMAR and ALLW is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2025	0.53

The correlation between UMAR and ALLW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.53 - a consistent structural relationship.

UMAR vs. ALLW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UMAR	ALLW
Technology	33.6%	26.3%
Financial Services	12.2%	15.8%
Communication Services	10.5%	9.7%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	11.0%
Healthcare	9.5%	8.2%
Industrials	8.5%	9.2%
Consumer Defensive	5.3%	5.9%
Energy	4.0%	4.9%
Utilities	2.6%	2.8%
Real Estate	2.0%	1.8%
Basic Materials	1.9%	4.6%

Return for Risk

UMAR vs. ALLW — Risk / Return Rank

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

UMAR

UMAR Risk / Return Rank: 89
UMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
UMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
UMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
UMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
UMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

ALLW

ALLW Risk / Return Rank: 71
ALLW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
ALLW Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
ALLW Omega Ratio Rank: 70
ALLW Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
ALLW Martin Ratio Rank: 76

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.

UMAR vs. ALLW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March (UMAR) and SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW). 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.

	UMAR	ALLW	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.03	2.34	+0.68
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.45	3.15	+1.30
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.66	1.43	+0.23
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.16	3.47	+0.69
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	23.27	14.77	+8.49
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UMAR vs. ALLW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.03, which is comparable to the ALLW Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMAR and ALLW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UMAR	ALLW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.03	2.34	+0.68
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.20	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.04	1.68	-0.64

Drawdowns

UMAR vs. ALLW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMAR drawdown since its inception was -11.08%, which is greater than ALLW's maximum drawdown of -8.78%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMAR and ALLW.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMAR	ALLW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.08%	-8.78%	-2.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.61%	-7.23%	+3.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.41%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-8.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.06%	-0.03%	-0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.63%	-1.20%	-0.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.65%	1.70%	-1.05%

Volatility

UMAR vs. ALLW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March (UMAR) is 0.95%, while SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF (ALLW) has a volatility of 3.36%. This indicates that UMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ALLW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMAR	ALLW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.95%	3.36%	-2.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.78%	8.69%	-4.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.94%	10.50%	-5.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.54%	12.54%	-6.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.52%	12.54%	-5.02%

UMAR vs. ALLW - Expense Ratio Comparison

UMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than ALLW's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

UMAR vs. ALLW - Dividend Comparison

UMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while ALLW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.25%.

Position	TTM	2025
ALLW SPDR Bridgewater All Weather ETF	4.25%	4.67%
UMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UMAR and ALLW in my portfolio?

UMAR and ALLW have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UMAR or ALLW?

ALLW has higher volatility (3.36%) compared to UMAR (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMAR dropped -11.08% vs ALLW's -8.78%.

Which ETF is better, UMAR or ALLW?

On 1-year performance, ALLW leads with 24.48% vs 14.89% for UMAR. On fees, UMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, UMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UMAR or ALLW?

Over the 1-year period, ALLW has performed better with a 24.48% return vs 14.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UMAR or ALLW?

UMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for ALLW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UMAR or ALLW?

ALLW has the higher dividend yield at 4.25%, compared with 0.00% for UMAR.

What is the main difference between UMAR and ALLW?

UMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while ALLW is Tactical Allocation. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for UMAR and 0.85% for ALLW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 2.34), 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.