UMAR vs. GLDI
UMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March) and GLDI (Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - UMAR is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500 Index, while GLDI is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Credit Suisse NASDAQ Gold FLOWS 103 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UMAR returned 7.83%/yr vs 11.15%/yr for GLDI. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. UMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for GLDI.
Performance
UMAR vs. GLDI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UMAR achieves a 5.78% return, which is significantly higher than GLDI's 2.06% return.
UMAR
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 1.97%
- YTD
- 5.78%
- 6M
- 6.56%
- 1Y
- 14.67%
- 3Y*
- 12.79%
- 5Y*
- 7.83%
- 10Y*
- —
GLDI
- 1D
- -0.81%
- 1M
- 0.90%
- YTD
- 2.06%
- 6M
- 4.42%
- 1Y
- 21.23%
- 3Y*
- 19.54%
- 5Y*
- 11.15%
- 10Y*
- 8.99%
UMAR vs. GLDI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March | 5.78% | 11.94% | 12.94% | 12.22% | -5.49% | 7.31% | 5.16% |
GLDI Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN | 2.06% | 34.25% | 17.76% | 8.93% | -1.11% | -3.42% | 20.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between UMAR and GLDI is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.19 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.14 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2020 | 0.14 |
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
UMAR vs. GLDI — Risk / Return Rank
UMAR
GLDI
UMAR vs. GLDI - 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 Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN (GLDI). 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 | GLDI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.52 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.49 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.65 | 1.30 | +0.35 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.08 | 1.55 | +2.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 22.77 | 6.07 | +16.70 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| UMAR | GLDI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.99 | 1.46 | +1.52 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.20 | 0.99 | +0.21 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.79 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.04 | 0.37 | +0.67 |
Drawdowns
UMAR vs. GLDI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UMAR drawdown since its inception was -11.08%, smaller than the maximum GLDI drawdown of -32.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMAR and GLDI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UMAR | GLDI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.08% | -32.26% | +21.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.61% | -13.73% | +10.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.41% | -13.73% | +6.32% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -8.72% | -14.07% | +5.35% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.94% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -7.37% | +7.37% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.63% | -14.00% | +12.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.65% | 3.50% | -2.85% |
Volatility
UMAR vs. GLDI - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March (UMAR) is 0.82%, while Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN (GLDI) has a volatility of 3.88%. This indicates that UMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLDI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UMAR | GLDI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.82% | 3.88% | -3.06% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.78% | 12.87% | -9.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.94% | 14.57% | -9.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.54% | 11.31% | -4.77% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.52% | 11.35% | -3.83% |
UMAR vs. GLDI - Expense Ratio Comparison
UMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than GLDI's 0.65% expense ratio.
Dividends
UMAR vs. GLDI - Dividend Comparison
UMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GLDI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 22.37%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLDI Credit Suisse X-Links Gold Shares Covered Call ETN | 22.37% | 16.15% | 10.45% | 10.02% | 13.73% | 10.65% | 14.25% | 7.25% | 5.33% | 7.77% | 17.26% | 10.07% |
UMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UMAR and GLDI have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLDI has higher volatility (3.88%) compared to UMAR (0.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMAR dropped -11.08% vs GLDI's -32.26%.
On 5-year performance, GLDI leads with 11.15% vs 7.83% for UMAR. On fees, GLDI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, UMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, GLDI has performed better with a 11.15% return vs 7.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
GLDI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for UMAR.
GLDI has the higher dividend yield at 22.37%, compared with 0.00% for UMAR.
UMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while GLDI is Precious Metals. UMAR tracks S&P 500 Index, while GLDI tracks Credit Suisse NASDAQ Gold FLOWS 103 Index. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Credit Suisse. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for UMAR and 0.65% for GLDI.
UMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 1.46), 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 UMAR and GLDI
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