Screener
PGHY vs KMAR
Invesco Global ex-US High Yield Corporate Bond ETF vs Innovator U.S. Small Cap Power Buffer ETF - March
Key differences
- PGHY costs 0.44% less per year.
- PGHY is significantly larger than KMAR — larger funds tend to be more liquid and less likely to close.
- PGHY is classified as fixed income, while KMAR is alternative — different risk/return profiles.
- PGHY follows a index tracking strategy; KMAR uses structured outcome.
- PGHY has a longer track record, which may reduce uncertainty around long-term behavior.
Side-by-side comparison
| PGHY | KMAR | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual cost (TER) | 0.35% | 0.79% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $212M | $35M |
| Since | 2013 | 2025 |
| Dividend yield | 7.09% | 0.00% |
| Asset class | fixed income | alternative |
| Region | — | north america |
| Strategy | index tracking | structured outcome |
| CAGR 1Y | +9.1% | +26.0% |
| CAGR 3Y | +9.6% | N/A |
| CAGR 5Y | +4.7% | N/A |
| Sharpe 3Y | 1.07 | N/A |
| Volatility 1Y | 4.98% | 9.38% |
| Max drawdown | -20.50% | -10.06% |
Green dot indicates the better value for that metric. Performance data is historical and does not predict future results.
Similar to PGHY and KMAR
Explore further