BMAY vs CONY
Innovator US Equity Buffer ETF - May vs YieldMax COIN Option Income Strategy ETF
Which is better, BMAY or CONY?
BMAY has been ahead.
BMAY has a lower expense ratio. BMAY led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window.
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
| Metric | BMAY | CONY |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79%Best | 1.04% |
| AUM | $239M | $381M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 119.91% |
| Holdings | 18 | 17 |
| YTD Return | +8.86%Best | -21.83% |
| 1Y Return | +11.65%Best | -42.68% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.64%Best | +9.76% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.89% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 6.7%Best | 60.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -12.8%Best | -63.6% |
| $10,000 over 3.2 years | $15,441Best | $13,425 |
| Fund Family | Innovator ETFs Trust | YieldMax ETF |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Apr 30, 2020 | Aug 14, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 15, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.2 years).
BMAY vs CONY 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 3.2 years both funds cover.
BMAY vs CONY Performance
Innovator US Equity Buffer ETF - May (BMAY) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust and YieldMax COIN Option Income Strategy ETF (CONY) is an ETF from YieldMax ETF. Over the past year BMAY returned +11.65% while CONY returned -42.68%. Year to date, BMAY is up 8.86% versus a loss of 21.83% for CONY.
Over three years, BMAY compounded at +15.64% per year against +9.76% for CONY.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CONY has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 60.7% compared with 6.7% for BMAY. 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 -12.8% for BMAY and -63.6% for CONY. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.52. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BMAY charges 0.79% per year while CONY charges 1.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $104 annually, a gap of $25 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BMAY currently yields 0.00% against 119.91% for CONY.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BMAY and CONY you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BMAY or CONY?
BMAY has an expense ratio of 0.79% while CONY charges 1.04%. BMAY is the cheaper option, by $25 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BMAY or CONY?
Over the past year BMAY returned +11.65% vs -42.68% for CONY, so BMAY leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BMAY or CONY?
CONY has been the more volatile fund at 60.7% annualized versus 6.7% for BMAY. Worst drawdown: BMAY -12.8% vs CONY -63.6%.
Should I hold both BMAY and CONY?
BMAY and CONY have a monthly-return correlation of 0.52, 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, BMAY or CONY?
BMAY yields 0.00% while CONY yields 119.91%, so CONY currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is CONY better than BMAY?
BMAY has a lower expense ratio. BMAY 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.