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

Performance

ZMAR vs. FAAR - 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 First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR). 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 2.51% return, which is significantly lower than FAAR's 20.23% return.


ZMAR

1D
-0.04%
1M
0.11%
YTD
2.51%
6M
2.64%
1Y
7.27%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FAAR

1D
-0.05%
1M
-4.34%
YTD
20.23%
6M
19.92%
1Y
26.86%
3Y*
10.91%
5Y*
7.89%
10Y*
4.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZMAR vs. FAAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ZMAR and FAAR is -0.06, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

-0.06

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

-0.01

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. FAAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZMAR
ZMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
ZMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
ZMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8989
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

FAAR
FAAR Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
FAAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FAAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
FAAR Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
FAAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
FAAR Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
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.

ZMAR vs. FAAR - 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 First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR). 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.


ZMARFAARDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.50

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.77

1.35

+0.42

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.07

4.75

+0.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

28.24

14.70

+13.54

ZMAR vs. FAAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.37, which is higher than the FAAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZMAR and FAAR, 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. FAAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZMAR drawdown since its inception was -2.89%, smaller than the maximum FAAR drawdown of -18.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZMAR and FAAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZMARFAARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-2.89%

-18.03%

+15.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.44%

-5.68%

+4.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.54%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.03%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.19%

-5.43%

+5.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.32%

-7.82%

+7.50%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.26%

1.89%

-1.63%

Volatility

ZMAR vs. FAAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR) is 0.68%, while First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) has a volatility of 2.47%. This indicates that ZMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FAAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZMARFAARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.68%

2.47%

-1.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.68%

9.68%

-8.00%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.17%

13.37%

-11.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.09%

12.95%

-9.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.09%

11.53%

-8.44%

ZMAR vs. FAAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZMAR has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than FAAR's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZMAR vs. FAAR - Dividend Comparison

ZMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FAAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.57%.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
FAAR
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF
9.57%11.63%3.45%3.20%5.82%6.49%3.05%1.02%0.58%2.83%
ZMAR
Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ZMAR and FAAR have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FAAR has higher volatility (2.47%) compared to ZMAR (0.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZMAR dropped -2.89% vs FAAR's -18.03%.

On 1-year performance, FAAR leads with 26.86% vs 7.27% for ZMAR. On fees, ZMAR is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, ZMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FAAR has performed better with a 26.86% return vs 7.27%. 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 0.95% for FAAR.

FAAR has the higher dividend yield at 9.57%, compared with 0.00% for ZMAR.

ZMAR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while FAAR is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ZMAR and 0.95% for FAAR.

ZMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.37 vs 2.02), 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 FAAR

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