ZMAY vs. TMAR

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

ZMAY (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. ZMAY is actively managed, while TMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, ZMAY returned 5.93% vs 27.30% for TMAR. At a 0.46 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ZMAY charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.

Performance

ZMAY vs. TMAR - 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 FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ZMAY achieves a 2.24% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 13.87% return.

ZMAY

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

TMAR

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 0.74%
• YTD: 13.87%
• 6M: 15.22%
• 1Y: 27.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ZMAY vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ZMAY Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May	2.24%	4.67%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	13.87%	16.06%

Correlation

The correlation between ZMAY and TMAR is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2025	0.46

Return for Risk

ZMAY vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ZMAY

ZMAY Risk / Return Rank: 97
ZMAY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
ZMAY Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ZMAY Omega Ratio Rank: 97
ZMAY Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ZMAY Martin Ratio Rank: 98

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 93
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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. TMAR - 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 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.

	ZMAY	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.11	2.90	+1.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.32	4.40	+2.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.95	1.72	+0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	15.23	7.53	+7.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	70.67	36.19	+34.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ZMAY vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ZMAY Sharpe Ratio is 4.11, which is higher than the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.90. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ZMAY 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ZMAY	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.11	2.90	+1.21
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	4.26	2.20	+2.06

Drawdowns

ZMAY vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ZMAY drawdown since its inception was -0.39%, smaller than the maximum TMAR drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ZMAY and TMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	ZMAY	TMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.39%	-9.93%	+9.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.39%	-3.64%	+3.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	-1.23%	+1.21%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.05%	-0.66%	+0.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.08%	0.76%	-0.68%

Volatility

ZMAY vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr May (ZMAY) is 0.50%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 4.35%. This indicates that ZMAY 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.

Volatility by Period

	ZMAY	TMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.50%	4.35%	-3.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.06%	8.20%	-7.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.45%	9.48%	-8.03%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.52%	11.41%	-9.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.52%	11.41%	-9.89%

ZMAY vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

ZMAY vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither ZMAY nor TMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ZMAY and TMAR in my portfolio?

ZMAY and TMAR have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ZMAY or TMAR?

TMAR has higher volatility (4.35%) compared to ZMAY (0.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ZMAY dropped -0.39% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

Which ETF is better, ZMAY or TMAR?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 27.30% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, ZMAY or TMAR?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 27.30% return vs 5.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ZMAY or TMAR?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ZMAY or TMAR?

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

What is the main difference between ZMAY and TMAR?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZMAY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.11 vs 2.90), 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.