PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZJUL vs. TMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZJUL vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr July (ZJUL) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZJUL achieves a 2.58% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 14.45% return.


ZJUL

1D
0.02%
1M
0.66%
YTD
2.58%
6M
2.81%
1Y
7.56%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

TMAR

1D
-0.72%
1M
2.73%
YTD
14.45%
6M
15.92%
1Y
28.83%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZJUL vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ZJUL and TMAR is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.44

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025

0.44

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

ZJUL vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZJUL
ZJUL Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
ZJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
ZJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

TMAR
TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9595
Calmar Ratio Rank
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
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.

ZJUL vs. TMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr July (ZJUL) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.


ZJULTMARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.91

3.06

-0.15

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.78

4.63

+0.14

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.62

1.77

-0.15

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

5.29

7.95

-2.66

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

28.77

38.42

-9.65

ZJUL vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.91, which is comparable to the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZJUL and TMAR, 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


ZJULTMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.91

3.06

-0.15

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.60

2.25

-0.66

Drawdowns

ZJUL vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZJUL drawdown since its inception was -5.51%, smaller than the maximum TMAR drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZJUL and TMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZJULTMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-5.51%

-9.93%

+4.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.43%

-3.64%

+2.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.72%

+0.72%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.47%

-0.66%

+0.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.26%

0.75%

-0.49%

Volatility

ZJUL vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr July (ZJUL) is 0.24%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that ZJUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZJULTMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.24%

4.53%

-4.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.83%

8.17%

-6.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.62%

9.47%

-6.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.65%

11.42%

-6.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.65%

11.42%

-6.77%

ZJUL vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZJUL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZJUL vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither ZJUL nor TMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ZJUL and TMAR have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

TMAR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to ZJUL (0.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZJUL dropped -5.51% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 28.83% vs 7.56% for ZJUL. On fees, ZJUL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, ZJUL has been the lower-risk option at 0.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 28.83% return vs 7.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ZJUL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

ZJUL and TMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ZJUL and 0.95% for TMAR.

TMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs 2.91), 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 ZJUL and TMAR

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