DECM vs. EAPR

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

DECM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - December) and EAPR (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds - DECM tracks the S&P 500 while EAPR tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, DECM returned 7.02% vs 15.75% for EAPR. Their 0.55 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. DECM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EAPR.

Performance

DECM vs. EAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - December (DECM) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DECM achieves a 3.22% return, which is significantly lower than EAPR's 9.17% return.

DECM

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 0.53%
• 6M: 2.77%
• YTD: 3.22%
• 1Y: 7.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.22%

EAPR

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: 0.32%
• 6M: 8.21%
• YTD: 9.17%
• 1Y: 15.75%
• 3Y*: 8.62%
• 5Y*: 5.46%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.84%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
DECM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - December	$23.88K	$19.38K	$108.16K
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	$354.30K	$262.28K	$462.78K

DECM vs. EAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
DECM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - December	3.22%	6.85%	-0.13%
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	9.17%	14.80%	-0.90%

Correlation

The correlation between DECM and EAPR is 0.57, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 23, 2024	0.55

The correlation between DECM and EAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

DECM vs. EAPR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

DECM

DECM Risk / Return Rank: 94
DECM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
DECM Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
DECM Omega Ratio Rank: 96
DECM Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
DECM Martin Ratio Rank: 95

EAPR

EAPR Risk / Return Rank: 79
EAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
EAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
EAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 87
EAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
EAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 86

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

DECM vs. EAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - December (DECM) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). 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.

	DECM	EAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	1.59	+1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.34	2.34	+2.00
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.59	1.39	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.95	2.90	+1.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.19	12.34	+7.85

DECM vs. EAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DECM Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is higher than the EAPR Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DECM and EAPR, 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

DECM vs. EAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DECM drawdown since its inception was -3.00%, smaller than the maximum EAPR drawdown of -17.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DECM and EAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	DECM	EAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.00%	-17.65%	+14.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.71%	-5.28%	+3.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.24%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-16.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-2.78%	+2.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.35%	-4.02%	+3.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.33%	1.24%	-0.91%

Volatility

DECM vs. EAPR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - December (DECM) is 0.58%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR) has a volatility of 4.40%. This indicates that DECM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DECM	EAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.58%	4.40%	-3.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.92%	9.26%	-7.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40%	9.63%	-7.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.91%	10.41%	-7.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.91%	10.30%	-7.39%

DECM vs. EAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

DECM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than EAPR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

DECM vs. EAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither DECM nor EAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DECM and EAPR in my portfolio?

DECM and EAPR have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, DECM or EAPR?

EAPR has higher volatility (4.40%) compared to DECM (0.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DECM dropped -3.00% vs EAPR's -17.65%.

Which ETF is better, DECM or EAPR?

On 1-year performance, EAPR leads with 15.75% vs 7.02% for DECM. On fees, DECM is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, DECM has been the lower-risk option at 0.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DECM or EAPR?

Over the 1-year period, EAPR has performed better with a 15.75% return vs 7.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DECM or EAPR?

DECM is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DECM or EAPR?

DECM and EAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between DECM and EAPR?

DECM tracks S&P 500, while EAPR tracks MSCI Emerging Markets. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DECM and 0.89% for EAPR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DECM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.81 vs 1.59), 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.