AOCT vs. ZAPR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

AOCT (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026) and ZAPR (Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AOCT returned 7.00% vs 6.50% for ZAPR. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

AOCT vs. ZAPR - 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 Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AOCT achieves a 2.75% return, which is significantly lower than ZAPR's 3.01% return.

AOCT

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.39%
• YTD: 2.75%
• 6M: 2.88%
• 1Y: 7.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ZAPR

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -0.06%
• YTD: 3.01%
• 6M: 3.01%
• 1Y: 6.50%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AOCT vs. ZAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AOCT Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026	2.75%	7.01%
ZAPR Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April	3.01%	5.31%

Correlation

The correlation between AOCT and ZAPR is 0.55, 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	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	0.59

The correlation between AOCT and ZAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AOCT vs. ZAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

AOCT

AOCT Risk / Return Rank: 91
AOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
AOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
AOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 93
AOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
AOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 94

ZAPR

ZAPR Risk / Return Rank: 98
ZAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
ZAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ZAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ZAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ZAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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. ZAPR - 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 Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AOCT	ZAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.73	4.48	-1.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.20	7.98	-3.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.58	2.13	-0.55
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.25	16.26	-12.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.25	73.32	-50.07

AOCT vs. ZAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AOCT Sharpe Ratio is 2.73, which is lower than the ZAPR Sharpe Ratio of 4.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AOCT and ZAPR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

AOCT vs. ZAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AOCT drawdown since its inception was -3.71%, which is greater than ZAPR's maximum drawdown of -1.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AOCT and ZAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	AOCT	ZAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.71%	-1.72%	-1.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.65%	-0.40%	-1.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-0.30%	+0.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.36%	-0.09%	-0.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.30%	0.09%	+0.21%

Volatility

AOCT vs. ZAPR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr to October 2026 (AOCT) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr April (ZAPR) have volatilities of 0.54% and 0.52%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AOCT	ZAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.54%	0.52%	+0.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.98%	1.11%	+0.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.59%	1.48%	+1.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.85%	2.49%	+1.36%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.85%	2.49%	+1.36%

AOCT vs. ZAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AOCT and ZAPR have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

AOCT vs. ZAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither AOCT nor ZAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AOCT and ZAPR in my portfolio?

AOCT and ZAPR have a correlation of 0.55, 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 ZAPR?

AOCT has higher volatility (0.54%) compared to ZAPR (0.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AOCT dropped -3.71% vs ZAPR's -1.72%.

Which ETF is better, AOCT or ZAPR?

On 1-year performance, AOCT leads with 7.00% vs 6.50% for ZAPR. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AOCT or ZAPR?

Over the 1-year period, AOCT has performed better with a 7.00% return vs 6.50%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AOCT or ZAPR?

AOCT and ZAPR have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

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

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ZAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.48 vs 2.73), 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.