APRH vs BFEB

APRH vs BFEB

Which is better, APRH or BFEB?

BFEB has been ahead.

BFEB led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window.

Lower Fees: TiedHigher Returns: BFEB

MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.

Side-by-Side Comparison

MetricAPRHBFEB
Expense Ratio0.79%Tie0.79%Tie
AUM$25M$262M
Dividend Yield5.85%0.00%
Holdings2412
YTD Return+0.62%+12.51%Best
1Y Return+0.20%+16.31%Best
3Y Return (annualized)+4.31%+17.35%Best
5Y Return (annualized)-+12.01%
Volatility (annualized)3.2%Best8.5%
Max Drawdown-5.9%Best-13.8%
$10,000 over 3.5 years$11,886$17,000Best
Fund FamilyInnovator ETFs TrustInnovator ETFs Trust
CategoryAlternativeAlternative
StyleMulti AlternativeMulti Alternative
InceptionApr 3, 2023Feb 3, 2020

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.5 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 3, 2023 to Oct 13, 2026 (3.5 years).

APRH vs BFEB growth

Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 3.5 years both funds cover.

Compare APRH against instead:APRH vs SPYAPRH vs QQQAPRH vs VOOAPRH vs VTIBFEB against:BFEB vs VXUS

APRH vs BFEB Performance

Innovator Premium Income 20 Barrier ETF - April (APRH) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust and Innovator US Equity Buffer ETF - February (BFEB) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year APRH returned +0.20% while BFEB returned +16.31%. Year to date, APRH is up 0.62% versus a gain of 12.51% for BFEB.

Over three years, APRH compounded at +4.31% per year against +17.35% for BFEB. Across the full 4-year window we track, BFEB has the edge at +16.37% annualized vs +5.06%.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

BFEB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 8.5% compared with 3.2% for APRH. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.

The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -5.9% for APRH and -13.8% for BFEB. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.61. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.

Fees and Cost Over Time

APRH charges 0.79% per year while BFEB charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $79 annually. On income, APRH currently yields 5.85% against 0.00% for BFEB.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of APRH and BFEB you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

APRHBFEB

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, APRH or BFEB?

APRH has an expense ratio of 0.79% while BFEB charges 0.79%. At the precision these are quoted to, they cost the same.

Which performed better, APRH or BFEB?

Over the past year APRH returned +0.20% vs +16.31% for BFEB, so BFEB leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), APRH annualized +5.06% vs +16.37% for BFEB. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, APRH or BFEB?

BFEB has been the more volatile fund at 8.5% annualized versus 3.2% for APRH. Worst drawdown: APRH -5.9% vs BFEB -13.8%.

Should I hold both APRH and BFEB?

APRH and BFEB have a monthly-return correlation of 0.61, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which pays a higher dividend, APRH or BFEB?

APRH yields 5.85% while BFEB yields 0.00%, so APRH currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is BFEB better than APRH?

BFEB led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.