UMAY vs. NAPR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UMAY (Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May) and NAPR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April) are both exchange-traded funds - UMAY is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500, while NAPR is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ-100 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, UMAY returned 6.49%/yr vs 10.10%/yr for NAPR. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

UMAY vs. NAPR - 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 Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April (NAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, UMAY achieves a 3.93% return, which is significantly lower than NAPR's 10.51% return.

UMAY

• 1D: -0.27%
• 1M: 1.86%
• YTD: 3.93%
• 6M: 4.74%
• 1Y: 10.48%
• 3Y*: 11.51%
• 5Y*: 6.49%
• 10Y*: —

NAPR

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 2.09%
• YTD: 10.51%
• 6M: 11.15%
• 1Y: 18.45%
• 3Y*: 13.26%
• 5Y*: 10.10%
• 10Y*: —

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

UMAY vs. NAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
UMAY Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May	3.93%	8.79%	14.32%	12.53%	-9.21%	5.25%	7.38%
NAPR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April	10.51%	6.56%	13.29%	30.60%	-12.13%	9.09%	8.98%

Correlation

The correlation between UMAY and NAPR is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.82
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 4, 2020	0.81

The correlation between UMAY and NAPR shifts across timeframes, from 0.74 (1 year) to 0.85 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

UMAY vs. NAPR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UMAY	NAPR
Technology	36.2%	50.7%
Financial Services	11.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.9%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	12.5%
Healthcare	8.4%	5.1%
Industrials	8.1%	3.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	8.7%
Energy	3.5%	0.7%
Utilities	2.3%	1.6%
Real Estate	1.9%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.3%

Return for Risk

UMAY vs. NAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

UMAY

UMAY Risk / Return Rank: 93
UMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
UMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
UMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 94
UMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
UMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 96

NAPR

NAPR Risk / Return Rank: 98
NAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
NAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
NAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
NAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
NAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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. NAPR - 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 Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April (NAPR). 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	NAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.99	4.78	-1.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.63	8.66	-4.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.67	2.18	-0.52
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.71	14.95	-7.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	39.51	84.84	-45.34
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. NAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UMAY Sharpe Ratio is 2.99, which is lower than the NAPR Sharpe Ratio of 4.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UMAY and NAPR, 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

	UMAY	NAPR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.99	4.78	-1.79
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.77	0.90	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.86	1.07	-0.21

Drawdowns

UMAY vs. NAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UMAY drawdown since its inception was -12.12%, smaller than the maximum NAPR drawdown of -16.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UMAY and NAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	UMAY	NAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.12%	-16.53%	+4.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.36%	-1.24%	-0.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.49%	-14.52%	+4.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-12.12%	-16.53%	+4.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.27%	-0.12%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.14%	-2.28%	+0.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.27%	0.22%	+0.05%

Volatility

UMAY vs. NAPR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Ultra Buffer ETF - May (UMAY) has a higher volatility of 1.20% compared to Innovator Nasdaq-100 Power Buffer ETF - April (NAPR) at 1.10%. This indicates that UMAY's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than NAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	UMAY	NAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.20%	1.10%	+0.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.40%	2.82%	-0.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.53%	3.89%	-0.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.46%	11.27%	-2.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.93%	10.61%	-2.68%

UMAY vs. NAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both UMAY and NAPR have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

UMAY vs. NAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither UMAY nor NAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UMAY and NAPR in my portfolio?

UMAY and NAPR have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, UMAY or NAPR?

UMAY has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to NAPR (1.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UMAY dropped -12.12% vs NAPR's -16.53%.

Which ETF is better, UMAY or NAPR?

On 5-year performance, NAPR leads with 10.10% vs 6.49% for UMAY. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, NAPR has been the lower-risk option at 1.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, UMAY or NAPR?

Over the 5-year period, NAPR has performed better with a 10.10% return vs 6.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UMAY or NAPR?

UMAY and NAPR have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, UMAY or NAPR?

UMAY and NAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between UMAY and NAPR?

UMAY is categorized as Defined Outcome, while NAPR is Nasdaq-100. UMAY tracks S&P 500, while NAPR tracks NASDAQ-100 Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.78 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.