PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ZMAY vs. QFLR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ZMAY vs. QFLR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May (ZMAY) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZMAY achieves a 2.24% return, which is significantly lower than QFLR's 6.83% return.


ZMAY

1D
0.04%
1M
0.62%
YTD
2.24%
6M
2.79%
1Y
5.93%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QFLR

1D
-0.07%
1M
3.24%
YTD
6.83%
6M
5.81%
1Y
26.58%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZMAY vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between ZMAY and QFLR is 0.62, 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

0.62

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2025

0.61

The correlation between ZMAY and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.62 - 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

ZMAY vs. QFLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZMAY
ZMAY Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
ZMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ZMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
ZMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
ZMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
ZMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

QFLR
QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
QFLR 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.

ZMAY vs. QFLR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May (ZMAY) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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.


ZMAYQFLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+4.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.95

1.44

+0.52

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

15.23

3.51

+11.72

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

70.67

14.97

+55.70

ZMAY vs. QFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZMAY Sharpe Ratio is 4.11, which is higher than the QFLR Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZMAY and QFLR, 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


ZMAYQFLRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.11

2.37

+1.74

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

4.26

1.39

+2.86

Drawdowns

ZMAY vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZMAY drawdown since its inception was -0.39%, smaller than the maximum QFLR drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZMAY and QFLR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ZMAYQFLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.39%

-13.97%

+13.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.39%

-7.61%

+7.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.02%

-0.54%

+0.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.05%

-2.49%

+2.44%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.08%

1.78%

-1.70%

Volatility

ZMAY vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May (ZMAY) is 0.50%, while Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) has a volatility of 2.50%. This indicates that ZMAY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ZMAYQFLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.50%

2.50%

-2.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.06%

8.04%

-6.98%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.45%

11.27%

-9.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.52%

12.61%

-11.09%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

1.52%

12.61%

-11.09%

ZMAY vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ZMAY has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QFLR's 0.89% expense ratio.


Dividends

ZMAY vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison

Neither ZMAY nor QFLR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


ZMAY and QFLR have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QFLR has higher volatility (2.50%) compared to ZMAY (0.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZMAY dropped -0.39% vs QFLR's -13.97%.

On 1-year performance, QFLR leads with 26.58% vs 5.93% for ZMAY. On fees, ZMAY is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, ZMAY 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, QFLR has performed better with a 26.58% return vs 5.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ZMAY is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.

ZMAY and QFLR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

ZMAY is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for ZMAY and 0.89% for QFLR.

ZMAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.11 vs 2.37), 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 ZMAY and QFLR

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