Skip to content
etf.net

BMAR vs ZALT

Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF

BMARCCboe

Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

ZALTACboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

ZALT −0.10pt a year

BMAR0.79%ZALT0.69%

Avg volume · 30D

ZALT 8.7×the volume

BMAR15.9KZALT138K

3Y return · a year

BMAR +7.1pt

BMAR+17.1%ZALT+10.0%

BMAR vs ZALT Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Nov 2, 2026

+12.7%BMAR+6.9%ZALT

Oct 31, 2025 to Nov 2, 2026. BMAR +12.7%. ZALT +6.9%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%2.5%5%10%15%Oct 2025May 2026Nov 2026
Expense ratio
BMAR 0.79%
ZALT 0.69%, better
Fund size
BMAR $201M
ZALT $840M
1Y total return
BMAR +12.7%, better
ZALT +6.9%
Holdings
BMAR 3
ZALT 503
Avg volume (30D)
BMAR 15.9K sh
ZALT 138K sh, better
NAV per share
BMAR $58.97
ZALT $34.50
52W range

ETF.net Grade

BMAR: Cost 40, Risk 63, Mission not scored, Tradability 61, Holdings not scored, Durability 68. ZALT: Cost 82, Risk 79, Mission 80, Tradability 65, Holdings 90, Durability 61.
Pillar letters and Scores for BMAR, ZALT, with each pillar’s weight
PillarBMARZALT
Cost30% weightC40A82Higher
Mission25% weightNot scoredA80
Risk15% weightB63A79Higher
Tradability15% weightB61B65Higher
Holdings10% weightNot scoredA90
Durability5% weightB68HigherB61

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds

How we build Categories ›
Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. BMAR and ZALT are both graded against the same 77 S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

S&P 500 Buffer 9-12%⁠

Category · 77 funds
See all 77 ›

ZALT ranks 1st and BMAR 33rd of 77 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% Category.

  1. Rank 1AZALTInnovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - QuarterlyScore 77
  2. Rank 2BAUGPPGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - AugustScore 67
  3. Rank 33CBAPRInnovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETFScore 52
  4. Rank 33CBMARInnovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETFScore 52
  5. Rank 33CNVBTAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer10 Nov ETFScore 52

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

BMARCInnovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF

ZALTAInnovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

In short

BMAR The March vintage of Innovator's buffer lineup: it tracks SPY up to a cap set each March 1, and absorbs the first 9% of losses over the 12 months that follow. Running since 2020.

ZALT The defined-outcome trade on a three-month clock: ZALT follows SPY up to a cap and buffers the first 10% of a decline, then resets both every quarter. Four fresh caps a year, at a fee under the shallow-buffer median.

Stated mandate

BMAR The fund seeks to track SPY's return up to a predetermined cap while protecting against the first 9% of losses during the outcome period.

ZALT The fund seeks to follow SPY's return up to a predetermined cap while providing a 10% downside buffer over each three-month outcome period. It may be held indefinitely, with the defined outcomes resetting at the end of each period.

Why people hold it

  • BMAR The 9% cushion is written into the fund's terms, not left to a manager's judgment, and it resets with a fresh cap every March 1.innovatoretfs.com
  • At 0.79%, the fee sits right at the median for its shallow-buffer peer group. The March calendar slot costs no premium.
  • The reference asset is SPY itself, so the exposure underneath is plain US large-cap, with no bespoke index to decode.innovatoretfs.com
  • ZALT Resets on a quarterly clock: a new cap is set the first day of each calendar quarter and the 10% buffer starts over. Can be held indefinitely, no rolling into a new ticker.sec.govcboe.com
  • At 0.69% it undercuts the going rate for 10% buffer funds on the S&P 500, where peers like SIXZ, JULT and BJUN charge 0.74% to 0.79%.
  • The cushion is built from FLEX options on SPY itself, so the thing you are hedged against is the same fund most investors already watch.sec.gov
  • Sits among the stronger implementations in its shallow-buffer peer group on cost and ease of trading.

Worth knowing

  • BMAR Protection runs 9% deep and no further. Losses past that come through in full, and gains stop at the cap.
  • Terms are set for the full outcome period. Enter mid-period and your real cushion and remaining upside differ from the headline numbers.innovatoretfs.com
  • Laddered rivals cost less: BUFB spreads buffer exposure across vintages for 0.10%, a fraction of BMAR's 0.79%.
  • ZALT Three months of upside buys a lower ceiling. Each quarter's cap is priced off three-month options, so it lands well below what a 12-month buffer fund can offer.sec.gov
  • Buy mid-quarter and you inherit whatever cap and buffer are left, not the full 10%. The prospectus says so plainly.sec.gov
  • The fee comes out of the cushion: with the 0.69% fee counted, the prospectus puts the net buffer at 9.82% per period. No distributions so far, so return shows up in price.sec.gov

Full BMAR profile⁠

Full ZALT profile⁠

BMAR vs ZALT Holdings

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

BMAR vs ZALT Cost

Overpaying BMAR vs ZALT

$1,745

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • BMAR 0.79%

    $15,174

  • ZALT 0.69%

    $13,429

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • BMAR 0.79%
  • ZALT 0.69%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530BMAR $15,174ZALT $13,429

Year by year

YearBMARZALTOverpaying
10$1,405$1,232$173
20$5,331$4,697$634
30$15,174$13,429$1,745

Expense ratio

  • 0.79%BMAR
  • 0.69%ZALT, cheaper
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds
  • Median 0.79%

ZALT 14th cheapest of 77 funds

BMAR 34th cheapest of 77 funds

BMAR vs ZALT Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 2, 2026
Payout (12M)
BMAR None
ZALT None

Distribution history

BMARAll BMAR payments⁠

No distribution history available.

ZALTAll ZALT payments⁠

No distribution history available.

BMAR vs ZALT Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
BMAR 8.0%ZALT 3.8%, better
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
BMAR 1.58, betterZALT 1.50
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
BMAR −15.0%ZALT −8.2%since Oct 2023
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
BMAR 0.63ZALT 0.29

Popular comparisons

  • BMARCvsAUGPB

    Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • ZALTAvsAUGPB

    Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • BMARCvsTENJB

    Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF · iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 0.53%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • ZALTAvsTENJB

    Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly · iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.53%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • BMARCvsSIXJB

    Innovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETF · AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 0.74%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

  • ZALTAvsSIXJB

    Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly · AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.74%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.