XBJL vs. QB

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

XBJL (Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July) and QB (ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. XBJL is actively managed, while QB is passively managed. Over the past year, XBJL returned 11.71% vs 21.91% for QB. Their 0.64 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XBJL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for QB.

Performance

XBJL vs. QB - 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 ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBJL achieves a 5.65% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 14.64% return.

XBJL

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 1.34%
• 6M: 4.81%
• YTD: 5.65%
• 1Y: 11.71%
• 3Y*: 11.73%
• 5Y*: 9.25%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.23%

QB

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 3.21%
• 6M: 13.78%
• YTD: 14.64%
• 1Y: 21.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 19.42%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	$54.65K	$36.90K	$152.33K
XBJL Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July	$233.88K	$201.38K	$150.68K

XBJL vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XBJL Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July	5.65%	6.40%
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	14.64%	6.10%

Correlation

The correlation between XBJL and QB is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.64

The correlation between XBJL and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

XBJL vs. QB - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XBJL	QB
Technology	39.1%	49.9%
Financial Services	10.9%	0.2%
Communication Services	10.7%	16.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.9%	12.5%
Healthcare	8.3%	5.3%
Industrials	7.8%	3.7%
Consumer Defensive	4.5%	8.6%
Energy	3.1%	0.6%
Utilities	2.1%	1.6%
Real Estate	1.8%	0.1%
Basic Materials	1.7%	1.3%

Return for Risk

XBJL vs. QB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XBJL

XBJL Risk / Return Rank: 90
XBJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
XBJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
XBJL Omega Ratio Rank: 93
XBJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
XBJL Martin Ratio Rank: 94

QB

QB Risk / Return Rank: 96
QB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
QB Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
QB Omega Ratio Rank: 97
QB Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
QB Martin Ratio Rank: 97

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XBJL vs. QB - 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 ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	XBJL	QB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.22	3.03	-0.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.42	4.51	-1.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.73	-0.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.56	6.33	-2.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.45	30.39	-10.94

XBJL vs. QB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBJL Sharpe Ratio is 2.22, which is comparable to the QB Sharpe Ratio of 3.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBJL and QB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XBJL vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBJL drawdown since its inception was -11.78%, which is greater than QB's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBJL and QB.

Drawdown Indicators

	XBJL	QB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.78%	-3.47%	-8.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.30%	-3.47%	+0.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.74%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.78%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.59%	-0.42%	-1.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.60%	0.72%	-0.12%

Volatility

XBJL vs. QB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July (XBJL) is 2.14%, while ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) has a volatility of 2.38%. This indicates that XBJL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XBJL	QB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.14%	2.38%	-0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.13%	6.06%	-1.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.31%	7.27%	-1.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.93%	7.02%	+2.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.87%	7.02%	+2.85%

XBJL vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBJL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBJL vs. QB - Dividend Comparison

XBJL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.76%.

Position	TTM	2025
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	0.76%	0.48%
XBJL Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XBJL and QB in my portfolio?

XBJL and QB have a correlation of 0.66, 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 QB?

QB has higher volatility (2.38%) compared to XBJL (2.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBJL dropped -11.78% vs QB's -3.47%.

Which ETF is better, XBJL or QB?

On 1-year performance, QB leads with 21.91% vs 11.71% for XBJL. On fees, QB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, XBJL has been the lower-risk option at 2.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XBJL or QB?

Over the 1-year period, QB has performed better with a 21.91% return vs 11.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XBJL or QB?

QB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for XBJL.

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

QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.76%, compared with 0.00% for XBJL.

What is the main difference between XBJL and QB?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for XBJL and 0.58% for QB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 2.22), 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.