AUGT vs. EOCT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

AUGT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AUGT returned 19.40% vs 24.21% for EOCT. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AUGT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

AUGT vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUGT achieves a 6.41% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 7.67% return.

AUGT

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 1.96%
• YTD: 6.41%
• 6M: 6.99%
• 1Y: 19.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EOCT

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.70%
• YTD: 7.67%
• 6M: 9.16%
• 1Y: 24.21%
• 3Y*: 13.41%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AUGT vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
AUGT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF	6.41%	14.64%	19.69%	3.94%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	7.67%	22.03%	9.66%	-2.91%

Correlation

The correlation between AUGT and EOCT 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 Aug 2, 2023	0.62

The correlation between AUGT and EOCT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

AUGT vs. EOCT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	AUGT	EOCT
Technology	36.2%	37.0%
Financial Services	11.9%	19.4%
Communication Services	10.9%	6.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	9.6%
Healthcare	8.4%	2.9%
Industrials	8.1%	7.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	3.0%
Energy	3.5%	4.0%
Utilities	2.3%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.1%
Basic Materials	1.8%	6.5%

Return for Risk

AUGT vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUGT

AUGT Risk / Return Rank: 83
AUGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
AUGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
AUGT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
AUGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
AUGT Martin Ratio Rank: 88

EOCT

EOCT Risk / Return Rank: 84
EOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
EOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
EOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
EOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
EOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

AUGT vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT). 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.

	AUGT	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.61	2.69	-0.09
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	3.77	-0.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.52	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.63	4.10	-0.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.88	16.46	+2.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AUGT vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUGT Sharpe Ratio is 2.61, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUGT and EOCT, 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

	AUGT	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.61	2.69	-0.09
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.56	0.60	+0.96

Drawdowns

AUGT vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUGT drawdown since its inception was -13.12%, smaller than the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUGT and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUGT	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.12%	-20.35%	+7.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.36%	-5.93%	+0.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.25%	+0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.22%	-5.69%	+4.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.03%	1.47%	-0.44%

Volatility

AUGT vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) is 0.68%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) has a volatility of 1.70%. This indicates that AUGT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EOCT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AUGT	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.68%	1.70%	-1.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.50%	6.69%	-1.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.48%	9.06%	-1.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.18%	11.30%	-1.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.18%	11.30%	-1.12%

AUGT vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

AUGT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than EOCT's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

AUGT vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither AUGT nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AUGT and EOCT in my portfolio?

AUGT and EOCT 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, AUGT or EOCT?

EOCT has higher volatility (1.70%) compared to AUGT (0.68%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUGT dropped -13.12% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, AUGT or EOCT?

On 1-year performance, EOCT leads with 24.21% vs 19.40% for AUGT. On fees, AUGT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, AUGT has been the lower-risk option at 0.68%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AUGT or EOCT?

Over the 1-year period, EOCT has performed better with a 24.21% return vs 19.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUGT or EOCT?

AUGT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EOCT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AUGT or EOCT?

AUGT and EOCT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between AUGT and EOCT?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for AUGT and 0.89% for EOCT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 2.61), 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.