XBJL vs. DMAX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XBJL (Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July) and DMAX (iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. XBJL is actively managed, while DMAX is passively managed. Over the past year, XBJL returned 12.17% vs 8.46% for DMAX. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XBJL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for DMAX.

Performance

XBJL vs. DMAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July (XBJL) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF (DMAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBJL achieves a 4.17% return, which is significantly higher than DMAX's 2.34% return.

XBJL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 1.01%
• YTD: 4.17%
• 6M: 5.05%
• 1Y: 12.17%
• 3Y*: 11.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DMAX

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 0.86%
• YTD: 2.34%
• 6M: 3.01%
• 1Y: 8.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XBJL vs. DMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XBJL Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July	4.17%	12.05%
DMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF	2.34%	7.81%

Correlation

The correlation between XBJL and DMAX is 0.78, 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	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2025	0.82

The correlation between XBJL and DMAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XBJL vs. DMAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

XBJL

XBJL Risk / Return Rank: 82
XBJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
XBJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
XBJL Omega Ratio Rank: 87
XBJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
XBJL Martin Ratio Rank: 90

DMAX

DMAX Risk / Return Rank: 94
DMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
DMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
DMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 96
DMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
DMAX 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.

XBJL vs. DMAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July (XBJL) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF (DMAX). 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.

	XBJL	DMAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	3.65	-1.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	5.65	-1.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.79	-0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.70	6.01	-2.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.85	30.74	-9.88
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XBJL vs. DMAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBJL Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is lower than the DMAX Sharpe Ratio of 3.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBJL and DMAX, 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

	XBJL	DMAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	3.65	-1.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.93	2.14	-1.21

Drawdowns

XBJL vs. DMAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBJL drawdown since its inception was -11.78%, which is greater than DMAX's maximum drawdown of -3.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBJL and DMAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	XBJL	DMAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.78%	-3.37%	-8.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.30%	-1.41%	-1.89%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.74%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.07%	+0.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.63%	-0.38%	-1.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.58%	0.28%	+0.30%

Volatility

XBJL vs. DMAX - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July (XBJL) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF (DMAX) have volatilities of 0.32% and 0.32%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XBJL	DMAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.32%	0.32%	0.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.72%	1.54%	+2.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.08%	2.33%	+2.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.99%	3.40%	+6.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.99%	3.40%	+6.59%

XBJL vs. DMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBJL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than DMAX's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBJL vs. DMAX - Dividend Comparison

XBJL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DMAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.15%.

Position	TTM	2025
DMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer December ETF	1.15%	1.18%
XBJL Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XBJL and DMAX in my portfolio?

XBJL and DMAX have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XBJL or DMAX?

DMAX has higher volatility (0.32%) compared to XBJL (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBJL dropped -11.78% vs DMAX's -3.37%.

Which ETF is better, XBJL or DMAX?

On 1-year performance, XBJL leads with 12.17% vs 8.46% for DMAX. On fees, DMAX is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XBJL or DMAX?

Over the 1-year period, XBJL has performed better with a 12.17% return vs 8.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XBJL or DMAX?

DMAX is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for XBJL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XBJL or DMAX?

DMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.15%, compared with 0.00% for XBJL.

What is the main difference between XBJL and DMAX?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for XBJL and 0.50% for DMAX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DMAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.65 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.