AOCT vs. JULB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AOCT (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026) and JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. AOCT charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for JULB.

Performance

AOCT vs. JULB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026 (AOCT) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOCT achieves a 2.49% return, which is significantly lower than JULB's 6.35% return.

AOCT

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 0.72%
• YTD: 2.49%
• 6M: 2.99%
• 1Y: 7.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JULB

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 2.40%
• YTD: 6.35%
• 6M: 6.93%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

AOCT vs. JULB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AOCT Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026	2.49%	1.24%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	6.35%	2.56%

Correlation

The correlation between AOCT and JULB is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 15, 2025	0.84

Return for Risk

AOCT vs. JULB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

AOCT

AOCT Risk / Return Rank: 89
AOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
AOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
AOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 91
AOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
AOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 93

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

AOCT vs. JULB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026 (AOCT) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	AOCT	JULB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.84	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.37	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.42	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.23	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AOCT	JULB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.84	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.45	2.17	-0.73

Drawdowns

AOCT vs. JULB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOCT drawdown since its inception was -3.71%, smaller than the maximum JULB drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOCT and JULB.

Drawdown Indicators

	AOCT	JULB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.71%	-5.24%	+1.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.65%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-0.07%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.37%	-0.87%	+0.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.30%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AOCT	JULB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.38%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.95%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.58%	6.81%	-4.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.89%	6.81%	-2.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.89%	6.81%	-2.92%

AOCT vs. JULB - Expense Ratio Comparison

AOCT has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than JULB's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

AOCT vs. JULB - Dividend Comparison

Neither AOCT nor JULB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AOCT and JULB in my portfolio?

AOCT and JULB have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AOCT or JULB?

On fees, JULB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AOCT or JULB?

JULB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for AOCT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AOCT or JULB?

AOCT and JULB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between AOCT and JULB?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Aptus Capital Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for AOCT and 0.25% for JULB.