UMAR vs. ZMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UMAR (Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March) and ZMAR (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. UMAR is passively managed, while ZMAR is actively managed. Over the past year, UMAR returned 14.67% vs 7.62% for ZMAR. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

UMAR vs. ZMAR - 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 Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMAR achieves a 5.78% return, which is significantly higher than ZMAR's 2.66% return.

UMAR

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 1.97%
• YTD: 5.78%
• 6M: 6.56%
• 1Y: 14.67%
• 3Y*: 12.79%
• 5Y*: 7.83%
• 10Y*: —

ZMAR

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 0.76%
• YTD: 2.66%
• 6M: 3.27%
• 1Y: 7.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

UMAR vs. ZMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UMAR Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March	5.78%	9.99%
ZMAR Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March	2.66%	5.95%

Correlation

The correlation between UMAR and ZMAR is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2025	0.82

The correlation between UMAR and ZMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

UMAR vs. ZMAR — 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: 92
UMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
UMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
UMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

ZMAR

ZMAR Risk / Return Rank: 94
ZMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
ZMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
ZMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
ZMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
ZMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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. ZMAR - 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 Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR). 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	ZMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.99	3.61	-0.63
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.39	5.89	-1.51
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	1.84	-0.19
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.08	5.32	-1.24
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	22.77	30.39	-7.62
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. ZMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.99, which is comparable to the ZMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMAR and ZMAR, 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	ZMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.99	3.61	-0.63
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	2.29	-1.24

Drawdowns

UMAR vs. ZMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMAR drawdown since its inception was -11.08%, which is greater than ZMAR's maximum drawdown of -2.30%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMAR and ZMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMAR	ZMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.08%	-2.30%	-8.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.61%	-1.44%	-2.17%
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	0.00%	-0.05%	+0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.63%	-0.23%	-1.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.65%	0.25%	+0.40%

Volatility

UMAR vs. ZMAR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - March (UMAR) has a higher volatility of 0.82% compared to Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR) at 0.37%. This indicates that UMAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ZMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMAR	ZMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.82%	0.37%	+0.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.78%	1.57%	+2.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.94%	2.12%	+2.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.54%	3.05%	+3.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.52%	3.05%	+4.47%

UMAR vs. ZMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both UMAR and ZMAR have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

UMAR vs. ZMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither UMAR nor ZMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UMAR and ZMAR in my portfolio?

UMAR and ZMAR have a correlation of 0.84, 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 ZMAR?

UMAR has higher volatility (0.82%) compared to ZMAR (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMAR dropped -11.08% vs ZMAR's -2.30%.

Which ETF is better, UMAR or ZMAR?

On 1-year performance, UMAR leads with 14.67% vs 7.62% for ZMAR. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, ZMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UMAR or ZMAR?

Over the 1-year period, UMAR has performed better with a 14.67% return vs 7.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UMAR or ZMAR?

UMAR and ZMAR have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

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

UMAR and ZMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.61 vs 2.99), 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.