PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZMAR vs. BNO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZMAR vs. BNO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZMAR achieves a 3.31% return, which is significantly lower than BNO's 68.89% return.


ZMAR

1D
0.17%
1M
0.54%
6M
2.73%
YTD
3.31%
1Y
6.73%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
6.12%

BNO

1D
-5.06%
1M
20.57%
6M
52.91%
YTD
68.89%
1Y
54.59%
3Y*
17.84%
5Y*
21.29%
10Y*
13.80%
ALL TIME*
3.97%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$109.23M$101.30M$143.17M
$109.42K$98.78K$299.32K

ZMAR vs. BNO - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ZMAR and BNO is -0.20, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.20

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 3, 2025

-0.09

The correlation between ZMAR and BNO shifts across timeframes, from -0.20 (1 year) to -0.09 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

ZMAR vs. BNO — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZMAR
ZMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
ZMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
ZMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

BNO
BNO Risk / Return Rank: 4747
Overall Rank
BNO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BNO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4949
Sortino Ratio Rank
BNO Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
BNO Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
BNO Martin Ratio Rank: 4343
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

ZMAR vs. BNO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR) and United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO). 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.


ZMARBNODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+3.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.71

1.23

+0.48

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.69

1.59

+3.10

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

25.58

4.81

+20.77

ZMAR vs. BNO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.15, which is higher than the BNO Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZMAR and BNO, 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...

Drawdowns

ZMAR vs. BNO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZMAR drawdown since its inception was -2.89%, smaller than the maximum BNO drawdown of -87.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZMAR and BNO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZMARBNODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-2.89%

-87.06%

+84.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.44%

-34.46%

+33.02%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-34.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-34.46%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-75.18%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-20.46%

+20.46%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.30%

-39.99%

+39.69%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.26%

11.41%

-11.15%

Volatility

ZMAR vs. BNO - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR) is 0.50%, while United States Brent Oil Fund LP (BNO) has a volatility of 18.59%. This indicates that ZMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BNO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZMARBNODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.50%

18.59%

-18.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.70%

41.33%

-39.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.15%

44.80%

-42.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.00%

36.47%

-33.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.00%

37.01%

-34.01%

ZMAR vs. BNO - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than BNO's 1.00% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZMAR vs. BNO - Dividend Comparison

Neither ZMAR nor BNO has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


ZMAR and BNO have a correlation of -0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BNO has higher volatility (18.59%) compared to ZMAR (0.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZMAR dropped -2.89% vs BNO's -87.06%.

On 1-year performance, BNO leads with 54.59% vs 6.73% for ZMAR. On fees, ZMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, ZMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BNO has performed better with a 54.59% return vs 6.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ZMAR is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for BNO.

ZMAR and BNO have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

ZMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BNO is Oil & Gas. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and USCF. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ZMAR and 1.00% for BNO.

ZMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.15 vs 1.23), 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 ZMAR and BNO

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