PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XBJA vs. DGT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XBJA vs. DGT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA) and State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF (DGT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBJA achieves a 5.55% return, which is significantly lower than DGT's 13.38% return.


XBJA

1D
0.03%
1M
1.89%
YTD
5.55%
6M
6.13%
1Y
14.87%
3Y*
11.81%
5Y*
10Y*

DGT

1D
0.50%
1M
4.18%
YTD
13.38%
6M
15.73%
1Y
31.75%
3Y*
23.15%
5Y*
13.84%
10Y*
14.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XBJA vs. DGT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
XBJA
Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January
5.55%11.12%11.68%17.62%-11.69%
DGT
State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF
13.38%30.04%14.15%20.95%-8.77%

Correlation

The correlation between XBJA and DGT is 0.75, 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

0.75

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 4, 2022

0.79

The correlation between XBJA and DGT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.79 - a consistent structural relationship.

XBJA vs. DGT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XBJA
DGT

Technology

36.2%
17.7%

Financial Services

11.9%
17.1%

Communication Services

10.9%
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
7.5%

Healthcare

8.4%
10.9%

Industrials

8.1%
13.9%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
7.6%

Energy

3.5%
7.1%

Utilities

2.3%
3.8%

Real Estate

1.9%
1.4%

Basic Materials

1.8%
7.1%

Technology

XBJA
36.2%
DGT
17.7%

Financial Services

XBJA
11.9%
DGT
17.1%

Communication Services

XBJA
10.9%
DGT
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

XBJA
10.1%
DGT
7.5%

Healthcare

XBJA
8.4%
DGT
10.9%

Industrials

XBJA
8.1%
DGT
13.9%

Consumer Defensive

XBJA
4.9%
DGT
7.6%

Energy

XBJA
3.5%
DGT
7.1%

Utilities

XBJA
2.3%
DGT
3.8%

Real Estate

XBJA
1.9%
DGT
1.4%

Basic Materials

XBJA
1.8%
DGT
7.1%

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

XBJA vs. DGT — Risk / Return Rank

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

XBJA
XBJA Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
XBJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XBJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
XBJA Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
XBJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
XBJA Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank

DGT
DGT Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
DGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
DGT Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
DGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 7676
Calmar Ratio Rank
DGT Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XBJA vs. DGT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA) and State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF (DGT). 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.


XBJADGTDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.54

2.67

-0.13

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.73

3.68

+0.06

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.59

1.50

+0.10

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.83

3.87

-1.04

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

16.57

15.72

+0.85

XBJA vs. DGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.54, which is comparable to the DGT Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBJA and DGT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XBJADGTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.54

2.67

-0.13

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.92

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.84

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.63

0.30

+0.33

Drawdowns

XBJA vs. DGT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBJA drawdown since its inception was -17.42%, smaller than the maximum DGT drawdown of -55.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBJA and DGT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XBJADGTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.42%

-55.36%

+37.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.33%

-8.38%

+3.05%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.57%

-14.67%

+2.10%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.40%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.15%

-13.83%

+10.68%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.91%

2.06%

-1.15%

Volatility

XBJA vs. DGT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA) is 0.78%, while State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF (DGT) has a volatility of 4.18%. This indicates that XBJA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DGT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XBJADGTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.78%

4.18%

-3.40%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.12%

9.53%

-4.41%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.89%

11.96%

-6.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.60%

15.16%

-3.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.60%

16.95%

-5.35%

XBJA vs. DGT - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBJA has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than DGT's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

XBJA vs. DGT - Dividend Comparison

XBJA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DGT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DGT
State Street SPDR Global Dow ETF
2.51%2.78%2.83%2.53%3.15%2.66%1.97%2.76%2.50%1.93%2.31%2.37%
XBJA
Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January
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


XBJA and DGT have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

DGT has higher volatility (4.18%) compared to XBJA (0.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBJA dropped -17.42% vs DGT's -55.36%.

On 3-year performance, DGT leads with 23.15% vs 11.81% for XBJA. On fees, DGT is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, XBJA has been the lower-risk option at 0.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, DGT has performed better with a 23.15% return vs 11.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

DGT is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for XBJA.

DGT has the higher dividend yield at 2.51%, compared with 0.00% for XBJA.

XBJA is categorized as Defined Outcome, while DGT is Global Equities. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for XBJA and 0.50% for DGT.

DGT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.54), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XBJA and DGT

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