PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZJAN vs. QMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZJAN vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr January (ZJAN) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZJAN achieves a 2.27% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 13.06% return.


ZJAN

1D
-0.05%
1M
0.76%
YTD
2.27%
6M
2.87%
1Y
7.49%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QMAR

1D
-0.09%
1M
2.81%
YTD
13.06%
6M
14.01%
1Y
23.38%
3Y*
16.73%
5Y*
12.13%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZJAN vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ZJAN and QMAR 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

0.81

The correlation between ZJAN and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

ZJAN vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZJAN
ZJAN Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
ZJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
ZJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
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.

ZJAN vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr January (ZJAN) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). 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.


ZJANQMARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.83

1.93

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.52

7.31

-1.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

28.73

52.66

-23.93

ZJAN vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZJAN Sharpe Ratio is 3.70, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZJAN and QMAR, 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


ZJANQMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.70

3.86

-0.16

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.18

0.91

+1.27

Drawdowns

ZJAN vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZJAN drawdown since its inception was -3.20%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZJAN and QMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZJANQMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.20%

-19.83%

+16.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.36%

-3.21%

+1.85%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.91%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.05%

-0.19%

+0.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.35%

-3.28%

+2.93%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.26%

0.45%

-0.19%

Volatility

ZJAN vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr January (ZJAN) is 0.39%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 1.27%. This indicates that ZJAN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZJANQMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.39%

1.27%

-0.88%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.45%

4.85%

-3.40%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.04%

6.09%

-4.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.97%

13.97%

-11.00%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.97%

13.85%

-10.88%

ZJAN vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZJAN has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZJAN vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither ZJAN nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ZJAN and QMAR 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.

QMAR has higher volatility (1.27%) compared to ZJAN (0.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZJAN dropped -3.20% vs QMAR's -19.83%.

On 1-year performance, QMAR leads with 23.38% vs 7.49% for ZJAN. On fees, ZJAN is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, ZJAN has been the lower-risk option at 0.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QMAR has performed better with a 23.38% return vs 7.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ZJAN is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMAR.

ZJAN and QMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

ZJAN is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QMAR is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ZJAN and 0.90% for QMAR.

QMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 vs 3.70), 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 ZJAN and QMAR

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