BMAY vs GIAX
Innovator US Equity Buffer ETF - May vs Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF
Which is better, BMAY or GIAX?
GIAX has been ahead.
BMAY has a lower expense ratio. GIAX led over 1Y 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 | GIAX |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79%Best | 1.03% |
| AUM | $239M | $115M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 24.34% |
| Holdings | 18 | 87 |
| YTD Return | +8.86% | +12.20%Best |
| 1Y Return | +11.65% | +12.86%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.64% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.89% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.2%Best | 20.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -12.8%Best | -20.4% |
| $10,000 over 2.2 years | $12,852 | $13,082Best |
| Fund Family | Innovator ETFs Trust | XFunds |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Apr 30, 2020 | Jul 29, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 30, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.2 years).
BMAY vs GIAX 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 2.2 years both funds cover.
BMAY vs GIAX Performance
Innovator US Equity Buffer ETF - May (BMAY) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust and Nicholas Global Equity and Income ETF (GIAX) is an ETF from XFunds. Over the past year BMAY returned +11.65% while GIAX returned +12.86%. Year to date, BMAY is up 8.86% versus a gain of 12.20% for GIAX.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GIAX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.7% compared with 5.2% 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 -20.4% for GIAX. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BMAY charges 0.79% per year while GIAX charges 1.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $103 annually, a gap of $24 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BMAY currently yields 0.00% against 24.34% for GIAX.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BMAY and GIAX 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 GIAX?
BMAY has an expense ratio of 0.79% while GIAX charges 1.03%. BMAY is the cheaper option, by $24 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BMAY or GIAX?
Over the past year BMAY returned +11.65% vs +12.86% for GIAX, so GIAX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), BMAY annualized +12.08% vs +12.99% for GIAX. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BMAY or GIAX?
GIAX has been the more volatile fund at 20.7% annualized versus 5.2% for BMAY. Worst drawdown: BMAY -12.8% vs GIAX -20.4%.
Should I hold both BMAY and GIAX?
BMAY and GIAX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, 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 GIAX?
BMAY yields 0.00% while GIAX yields 24.34%, so GIAX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is GIAX better than BMAY?
BMAY has a lower expense ratio. GIAX led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.