UMAY vs. FMAR

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May (UMAY) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR).

UMAY and FMAR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. UMAY is a passively managed fund by Innovator that tracks the performance of the S&P 500. It was launched on Apr 30, 2020. FMAR is an actively managed fund by FT Vest. It was launched on Mar 19, 2021.

Performance

UMAY vs. FMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May (UMAY) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

UMAY vs. FMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
UMAY Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May	0.88%	8.79%	14.32%	12.53%	-9.21%	4.31%
FMAR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March	2.73%	9.69%	14.61%	20.39%	-5.51%	11.38%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMAY achieves a 0.88% return, which is significantly lower than FMAR's 2.73% return.

UMAY

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.05%
• YTD: 0.88%
• 6M: 2.75%
• 1Y: 9.90%
• 3Y*: 11.24%
• 5Y*: 5.97%
• 10Y*: —

FMAR

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: 1.47%
• YTD: 2.73%
• 6M: 4.94%
• 1Y: 15.24%
• 3Y*: 13.19%
• 5Y*: 10.01%
• 10Y*: —

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

UMAY vs. FMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

UMAY has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than FMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.

FMAR

FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March

UMAY

Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May

Return for Risk

UMAY vs. FMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

UMAY

UMAY Risk / Return Rank: 53
UMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
UMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
UMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 79
UMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
UMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 61

FMAR

FMAR Risk / Return Rank: 79
FMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
FMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
FMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
FMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

UMAY vs. FMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May (UMAY) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR). 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.

	UMAY	FMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.88	1.39	-0.51
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.34	2.03	-0.69
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.43	-0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.13	1.87	-0.74
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.00	11.91	-4.92
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UMAY vs. FMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMAY Sharpe Ratio is 0.88, which is lower than the FMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMAY and FMAR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	UMAY	FMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88	1.39	-0.51
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	0.96	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.81	0.99	-0.18

Correlation

The correlation between UMAY and FMAR is 0.90, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

UMAY vs. FMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither UMAY nor FMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

UMAY vs. FMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMAY drawdown since its inception was -12.12%, smaller than the maximum FMAR drawdown of -14.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMAY and FMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMAY	FMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.12%	-14.36%	+2.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.02%	-8.31%	-0.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-12.12%	-14.36%	+2.24%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.04%	0.00%	-0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.20%	-2.21%	+0.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.46%	1.30%	+0.16%

Volatility

UMAY vs. FMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May (UMAY) is 1.69%, while FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR) has a volatility of 2.94%. This indicates that UMAY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMAY	FMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.69%	2.94%	-1.25%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.68%	3.79%	-1.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.30%	11.05%	+0.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.48%	10.49%	-2.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.03%	10.47%	-2.44%