Skip to content

XBAP vs XBJA

Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF

XBAPBCboe

Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF

XBJACCboe

Overlap

0.3%by weight

Expense ratio

Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.

XBAP0.79%XBJA0.79%

Avg volume · 30D

XBJA 1.3×the volume

XBAP5.79KXBJA7.68K

3Y return · a year

XBAP +2.5pt

XBAP+14.6%XBJA+12.1%

XBAP vs XBJA Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+13.2%XBAP+10.2%XBJA

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. XBAP +13.2%. XBJA +10.2%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−2.5%0%2.5%5%7.5%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
XBAP 0.79%
XBJA 0.79%
Fund size
XBAP $128M
XBJA $94M
1Y total return
XBAP +13.2%, better
XBJA +10.2%
Holdings
XBAP 6
XBJA 4
Avg volume (30D)
XBAP 5.79K sh
XBJA 7.68K sh, better
NAV per share
XBAP $42.99
XBJA $34.79
52W range

ETF.net Grade

XBAP: Cost 59, Risk 82, Mission not scored, Tradability 51, Holdings 59, Durability 83. XBJA: Cost 59, Risk 40, Mission not scored, Tradability 57, Holdings not scored, Durability 63.
Pillar letters and Scores for XBAP, XBJA, with each pillar’s weight
PillarXBAPXBJA
Cost30% weightB59B59
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightA82HigherC40
Tradability15% weightC51B57Higher
Holdings10% weightB59Not scored
Durability5% weightA83HigherB63

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

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. XBAP and XBJA are both graded against the same 6 S&P 500 Accelerated, 9-12% Buffer funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

See all 6 ›

XBAP ranks 1st and XBJA 3rd of 6 funds in the S&P 500 Accelerated, 9-12% Buffer Category.

  1. Rank 1BXBAPInnovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETFScore 63
  2. Rank 2BXBJLInnovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETFScore 56
  3. Rank 3CXBJAInnovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETFScore 54
  4. Rank 4CXBOCInnovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETFScore 52

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

XBAPBInnovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF

XBJACInnovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF

In short

XBAP Double the S&P 500's upside up to a cap, with the first 9% of losses absorbed and normal losses after that. A structured-note payoff shape in an ETF wrapper, reset every April.

XBJA Most buffered ETFs buy protection by selling away your upside. XBJA goes after both: twice SPY's price move up to a cap, roughly one-times exposure on the way down, and the first 9% of losses absorbed over a period that runs January to December.

Stated mandate

XBAP The Fund seeks twice the return of an ETF tracking the S&P 500 Index, subject to a cap, while buffering the first 9% of losses over the approximately one-year outcome period.

XBJA The fund seeks to deliver twice SPY's upside return up to a cap, with approximately one-times downside exposure, over a one-year outcome period. It protects the first 9% of losses during that period.

Why people hold it

  • XBAP Two dials at once: 2x the price gain of an S&P 500 ETF up to a cap, plus a 9% loss buffer, across each roughly one-year outcome period.innovatoretfs.com
  • No maturity date. The outcome period resets each April with a fresh cap and buffer, so the position can be held indefinitely without rolling into a new ticker. Running since 2021.innovatoretfs.com
  • 0.79% a year, the same fee its Innovator siblings charge (XBJA, XBJL, XBOC), and it rates as one of the stronger implementations in that small accelerated-buffer group.
  • A registered 1940 Act fund, not a bank note, so you get the defined-outcome payoff shape without a single issuer's IOU sitting behind it.innovatoretfs.com
  • XBJA Two-way structure: 2x SPY's price gain up to a cap, about 1x exposure on the downside, and the first 9 percentage points of a decline absorbed over the one-year outcome period.innovatoretfs.com
  • No expiration date. The period closes December 31 and the fund resets with a fresh 9% buffer and a newly set cap, so the outcome year and the calendar year move together.innovatoretfs.com
  • 0.79% expense ratio, the same sticker as the rest of Innovator's accelerated buffer shelf, including its April sibling XBAP.
  • Listed in January 2022, so several full reset cycles are already in the rear-view mirror rather than one untested outcome period.

Worth knowing

  • XBAP The cap is a hard ceiling on a blowout year, it is reset each April at whatever options pricing allows, and it is built on SPY's price return, so dividends sit outside the payoff.sec.gov
  • The stated outcomes are for holders who own shares from the first day of an outcome period to the last. Buy mid-period and your effective cap and remaining cushion differ.sec.govinnovatoretfs.com
  • A niche fund with a modest asset base and light trading volume, so bid-ask spreads can be wider than on a plain index ETF.
  • XBJA Buy mid-period and you inherit whatever cap room and buffer remain. After a run-up, the upside left can be thinner and the downside exposure larger than the headline terms suggest.innovatoretfs.com
  • The math runs off SPY's price return, so the S&P 500's dividends are not passed through. Innovator's own materials say the fund is not built for income seekers.innovatoretfs.com
  • Volume is light next to the headline buffer funds, which puts more weight on trading carefully: check the spread and use limit orders.

Full XBAP profile⁠

Full XBJA profile⁠

XBAP vs XBJA Holdings

How XBAP and XBJA differ

Overlap by weight

0.3%

Shared holdings make up 0.7% of XBAP and 0.3% of XBJA.

Level by level

  • Holdings1 in both0.3%
  • Sector11 Sectors98.1%
  • Asset classEquity100%
  • Countryby domicile100%

Sector

Sector weights in XBAP and XBJA, widest gap first
SectorMore in XBAPMore in XBJA
TechnologyXBJA +1.4 points
FinancialsXBAP +0.7 points
Consumer DiscretionaryXBAP +0.6 points
CommunicationXBJA +0.4 points
IndustrialsXBAP +0.2 points
MaterialsXBAP +0.1 points
UtilitiesXBAP +0.1 points
EnergyXBAP +0.1 points
Real EstateXBAP +0.1 points
Health CareXBJA +0.1 points
Consumer StaplesXBAP +0.1 points

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in XBAP and XBJA, widest gap first
CountryMore in XBAPMore in XBJA
United StatesSame weight
SwitzerlandSame weight
ChinaSame weight
MexicoSame weight
IrelandSame weight
United KingdomSame weight

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • XBAP123.9%
  • XBJA112.7%

Securities held

  • XBAP5
  • XBJA4

Asset class

XBAP
Equity
XBJA
Equity

Holdings

  • Only in XBAP4
  • In both1
  • Only in XBJA3

Only in XBAP

4 securities, 100% of XBAP by weight

  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF104.07%
  • Voo 03/31/2027 597.56 C17.53%
  • Voo 03/31/2027 597.56 P1.25%

Only in XBJA

3 securities, 100% of XBJA by weight

  • Spy 12/31/2026 6.79 C100.77%
  • Spy 12/31/2026 681.89 C11.02%
  • Spy 12/31/2026 681.89 P0.67%

Weight gaps

All 1 Holdings in both funds, largest gap first.

Holding weights in XBAP and XBJA, widest gap first
HoldingMore in XBAPMore in XBJA
Us Bank Mmda - Usbgfs 9 09/01/2037XBAP +0.38 points

All 7 XBAP holdings⁠All 7 XBJA 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.

XBAP vs XBJA Cost

Same expense ratio

$15,174

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

  • XBAP 0.79%

    $15,174

  • XBJA 0.79%

    $15,174

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • XBAP 0.79%
  • XBJA 0.79%
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530XBAP $15,174XBJA $15,174

Year by year

YearXBAPXBJA
10$1,405$1,405
20$5,331$5,331
30$15,174$15,174

Expense ratio

  • 0.79%XBAP
  • 0.79%XBJA
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Accelerated, 9-12% Buffer funds
  • Median 0.79%

XBAP cheapest of 6 funds

XBJA cheapest of 6 funds

XBAP vs XBJA Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
XBAP None
XBJA None

Distribution history

XBAPAll XBAP payments⁠

No distribution history available.

XBJAAll XBJA payments⁠

No distribution history available.

XBAP vs XBJA Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
XBAP 4.8%, betterXBJA 5.7%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
XBAP 1.96, betterXBJA 1.27
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
XBAP −14.6%XBJA −17.4%since Jan 2022
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
XBAP 0.34XBJA 0.40

Popular comparisons

  • XBAPBvsXBJLB

    Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF

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

    Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF

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

    Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF

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

    Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF

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

    Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated Plus ETF - July

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

    Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF · Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated Plus ETF - July

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