UMAR vs. QB
UMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March) and QB (ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds - UMAR tracks the S&P 500 Index while QB tracks the Nasdaq-100. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, UMAR returned 12.10% vs 18.28% for QB. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. UMAR charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for QB.
Performance
UMAR vs. QB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UMAR achieves a 5.99% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 12.15% return.
UMAR
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.86%
- 6M
- 5.43%
- YTD
- 5.99%
- 1Y
- 12.10%
- 3Y*
- 11.93%
- 5Y*
- 7.73%
- 10Y*
- —
QB
- 1D
- -0.14%
- 1M
- 3.02%
- 6M
- 10.85%
- YTD
- 12.15%
- 1Y
- 18.28%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
UMAR vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
UMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March | 5.99% | 7.15% |
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 12.15% | 6.10% |
Correlation
The correlation between UMAR and QB is 0.72, 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 | 0.72 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025 | 0.71 |
The correlation between UMAR and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.
UMAR vs. QB - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
UMAR
QB
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
UMAR
QB
Financial Services
UMAR
QB
Communication Services
UMAR
QB
Consumer Cyclical
UMAR
QB
Healthcare
UMAR
QB
Industrials
UMAR
QB
Consumer Defensive
UMAR
QB
Energy
UMAR
QB
Utilities
UMAR
QB
Real Estate
UMAR
QB
Basic Materials
UMAR
QB
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. QB — Risk / Return Rank
UMAR
QB
UMAR vs. QB - 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 ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). 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.
| UMAR | QB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.21 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.50 | 1.62 | -0.12 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.36 | 5.28 | -1.92 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.11 | 25.48 | -7.37 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
UMAR vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UMAR drawdown since its inception was -11.08%, which is greater than QB's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMAR and QB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UMAR | QB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.08% | -3.47% | -7.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.61% | -3.47% | -0.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.41% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -8.72% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.18% | -0.31% | +0.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.61% | -0.42% | -1.19% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.67% | 0.72% | -0.05% |
Volatility
UMAR vs. QB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March (UMAR) is 1.63%, while ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) has a volatility of 3.05%. This indicates that UMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| UMAR | QB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.63% | 3.05% | -1.42% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.20% | 5.83% | -1.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.06% | 7.03% | -1.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.59% | 6.93% | -0.34% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.50% | 6.93% | +0.57% |
UMAR vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison
UMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.
Dividends
UMAR vs. QB - Dividend Comparison
UMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 0.78% | 0.48% |
UMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UMAR and QB have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QB has higher volatility (3.05%) compared to UMAR (1.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMAR dropped -11.08% vs QB's -3.47%.
On 1-year performance, QB leads with 18.28% vs 12.10% for UMAR. On fees, QB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, UMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, QB has performed better with a 18.28% return vs 12.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for UMAR.
QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.00% for UMAR.
UMAR tracks S&P 500 Index, while QB tracks Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for UMAR and 0.58% for QB.
QB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 2.41), 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 QB
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