Screener
PFIG vs KMAR
Invesco Fundamental Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF vs Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March
Key differences
- PFIG costs 0.57% less per year.
- PFIG is significantly larger than KMAR — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- PFIG is classified as fixed income, while KMAR is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- PFIG follows a index tracking strategy; KMAR uses structured outcome.
- PFIG has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| PFIG | KMAR | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.22% | 0.79% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $113M | $35M |
| Since | 2011 | 2025 |
| Dividend yield | 4.37% | 0.00% |
| Asset class | fixed income | alternative |
| Region | north america | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | structured outcome |
| CAGR 1Y | +5.5% | +26.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +5.3% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | +1.5% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 0.40 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 3.09% | 9.38% |
| Max drawdown | -15.73% | -10.06% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to PFIG and KMAR
Explore further