AOCT vs. QFLR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AOCT (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026) and QFLR (Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - AOCT is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Innovator, while QFLR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AOCT returned 7.29% vs 26.98% for QFLR. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AOCT charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for QFLR.

Performance

AOCT vs. QFLR - 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 Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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 QFLR's 6.90% return.

AOCT

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

QFLR

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 3.99%
• YTD: 6.90%
• 6M: 5.88%
• 1Y: 26.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AOCT vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
AOCT Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026	2.49%	6.88%	-0.04%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	6.90%	17.27%	7.09%

Correlation

The correlation between AOCT and QFLR is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2024	0.65

The correlation between AOCT and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AOCT vs. QFLR — 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

QFLR

QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 74
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 74
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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. QFLR - 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 Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.84	2.41	+0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.37	3.26	+1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	1.44	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.42	3.56	+0.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.23	15.19	+9.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AOCT vs. QFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOCT Sharpe Ratio is 2.84, which is comparable to the QFLR Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOCT and QFLR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AOCT	QFLR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.84	2.41	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.45	1.40	+0.05

Drawdowns

AOCT vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOCT drawdown since its inception was -3.71%, smaller than the maximum QFLR drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOCT and QFLR.

Drawdown Indicators

	AOCT	QFLR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.71%	-13.97%	+10.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.65%	-7.61%	+5.96%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-0.48%	+0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.37%	-2.50%	+2.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.30%	1.78%	-1.48%

Volatility

AOCT vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026 (AOCT) is 0.38%, while Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) has a volatility of 2.53%. This indicates that AOCT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AOCT	QFLR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.38%	2.53%	-2.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.95%	8.05%	-6.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.58%	11.28%	-8.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.89%	12.62%	-8.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.89%	12.62%	-8.73%

AOCT vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

AOCT has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QFLR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

AOCT vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison

Neither AOCT nor QFLR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
AOCT Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	0.00%	0.02%	0.03%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AOCT and QFLR in my portfolio?

AOCT and QFLR have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AOCT or QFLR?

QFLR has higher volatility (2.53%) compared to AOCT (0.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOCT dropped -3.71% vs QFLR's -13.97%.

Which ETF is better, AOCT or QFLR?

On 1-year performance, QFLR leads with 26.98% vs 7.29% for AOCT. On fees, AOCT is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, AOCT has been the lower-risk option at 0.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AOCT or QFLR?

Over the 1-year period, QFLR has performed better with a 26.98% return vs 7.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AOCT or QFLR?

AOCT is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.

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

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

What is the main difference between AOCT and QFLR?

AOCT is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for AOCT and 0.89% for QFLR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

AOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.84 vs 2.41), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.