NAPR vs NNOV
Innovator Growth 100 Power Buffer ETF - April vs Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - November
Which is better, NAPR or NNOV?
Each has led over a different period.
NAPR led over 1Y, NNOV over 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 | NAPR | NNOV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79%Tie | 0.79%Tie |
| AUM | $211M | $77M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 18 | 18 |
| YTD Return | +13.46%Best | +13.27% |
| 1Y Return | +15.91%Best | +13.85% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.86% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.88% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.5%Best | 8.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -14.5% | -12.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.9 years | $12,413 | $12,867Best |
| Fund Family | Innovator ETFs Trust | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Mar 31, 2020 | Nov 1, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 1, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.9 years).
NAPR vs NNOV 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 1.9 years both funds cover.
NAPR vs NNOV Performance
Innovator Growth 100 Power Buffer ETF - April (NAPR) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust and Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - November (NNOV) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year NAPR returned +15.91% while NNOV returned +13.85%. Year to date, NAPR is up 13.46% versus a gain of 13.27% for NNOV.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NNOV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 8.9% compared with 7.5% for NAPR. 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 -14.5% for NAPR and -12.8% for NNOV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.87. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
NAPR charges 0.79% per year while NNOV charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $79 annually. On income, NAPR currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for NNOV.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of NAPR and NNOV 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, NAPR or NNOV?
NAPR has an expense ratio of 0.79% while NNOV charges 0.79%. At the precision these are quoted to, they cost the same.
Which performed better, NAPR or NNOV?
Over the past year NAPR returned +15.91% vs +13.85% for NNOV, so NAPR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), NAPR annualized +12.05% vs +14.19% for NNOV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, NAPR or NNOV?
NNOV has been the more volatile fund at 8.9% annualized versus 7.5% for NAPR. Worst drawdown: NAPR -14.5% vs NNOV -12.8%.
Should I hold both NAPR and NNOV?
NAPR and NNOV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.87, 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, NAPR or NNOV?
NAPR yields 0.00% while NNOV yields 0.00%, so NNOV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NNOV better than NAPR?
NAPR led over 1Y, NNOV over the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.