NAPR vs QTJL
Innovator Growth 100 Power Buffer ETF - April vs Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July
Which is better, NAPR or QTJL?
Each has led over a different period.
NAPR led over 1Y, QTJL over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92.
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 | QTJL |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79%Tie | 0.79%Tie |
| AUM | $211M | $27M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 18 | 15 |
| YTD Return | +13.46%Best | +10.01% |
| 1Y Return | +15.91%Best | +14.05% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.86% | +19.24%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.88% | +10.15%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 10.1%Best | 16.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -16.5%Best | -33.4% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,017 | $16,215Best |
| Fund Family | Innovator ETFs Trust | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Mar 31, 2020 | Jun 30, 2021 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 1, 2021 to Oct 14, 2026 (5.3 years).
NAPR vs QTJL 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 5.3 years both funds cover.
NAPR vs QTJL Performance
Innovator Growth 100 Power Buffer ETF - April (NAPR) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust and Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - July (QTJL) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year NAPR returned +15.91% while QTJL returned +14.05%. Year to date, NAPR is up 13.46% versus a gain of 10.01% for QTJL.
Over three years, NAPR compounded at +12.86% per year against +19.24% for QTJL; over five years the annualized figures are +9.88% and +10.15% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QTJL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.6% compared with 10.1% 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 -16.5% for NAPR and -33.4% for QTJL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
NAPR charges 0.79% per year while QTJL 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 QTJL.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of NAPR and QTJL 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 QTJL?
NAPR has an expense ratio of 0.79% while QTJL charges 0.79%. At the precision these are quoted to, they cost the same.
Which performed better, NAPR or QTJL?
Over the past year NAPR returned +15.91% vs +14.05% for QTJL, so NAPR leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, NAPR or QTJL?
QTJL has been the more volatile fund at 16.6% annualized versus 10.1% for NAPR. Worst drawdown: NAPR -16.5% vs QTJL -33.4%.
Should I hold both NAPR and QTJL?
NAPR and QTJL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, NAPR or QTJL?
NAPR yields 0.00% while QTJL yields 0.00%, so QTJL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QTJL better than NAPR?
NAPR led over 1Y, QTJL over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.