PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
EOCT vs. JANP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

EOCT vs. JANP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - January (JANP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EOCT achieves a 6.94% return, which is significantly higher than JANP's 5.34% return.


EOCT

1D
-1.28%
1M
0.17%
YTD
6.94%
6M
7.59%
1Y
22.61%
3Y*
13.31%
5Y*
10Y*

JANP

1D
-0.60%
1M
0.38%
YTD
5.34%
6M
5.50%
1Y
16.14%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

EOCT vs. JANP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between EOCT and JANP is 0.69, 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

0.69

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2024

0.62

The correlation between EOCT and JANP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

EOCT vs. JANP — Risk / Return Rank

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

EOCT
EOCT Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
EOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
EOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
EOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 8080
Calmar Ratio Rank
EOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank

JANP
JANP Risk / Return Rank: 8080
Overall Rank
JANP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JANP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
JANP Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
JANP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
JANP Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

EOCT vs. JANP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - January (JANP). 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.


EOCTJANPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.48

1.48

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.83

3.05

+0.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.25

15.67

-0.42

EOCT vs. JANP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EOCT Sharpe Ratio is 2.46, which is comparable to the JANP Sharpe Ratio of 2.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EOCT and JANP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

EOCT vs. JANP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EOCT drawdown since its inception was -20.35%, which is greater than JANP's maximum drawdown of -12.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EOCT and JANP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


EOCTJANPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-20.35%

-12.18%

-8.17%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.93%

-5.32%

-0.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.76%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.28%

-0.90%

-0.38%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.63%

-0.89%

-4.74%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.49%

1.03%

+0.46%

Volatility

EOCT vs. JANP - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) has a higher volatility of 2.87% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - January (JANP) at 2.33%. This indicates that EOCT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JANP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


EOCTJANPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.87%

2.33%

+0.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.09%

5.86%

+1.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.22%

6.94%

+2.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.31%

9.07%

+2.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.31%

9.07%

+2.24%

EOCT vs. JANP - Expense Ratio Comparison

EOCT has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than JANP's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

EOCT vs. JANP - Dividend Comparison

Neither EOCT nor JANP has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


EOCT and JANP have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EOCT has higher volatility (2.87%) compared to JANP (2.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EOCT dropped -20.35% vs JANP's -12.18%.

On 1-year performance, EOCT leads with 22.61% vs 16.14% for JANP. On fees, JANP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, JANP has been the lower-risk option at 2.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, EOCT has performed better with a 22.61% return vs 16.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

JANP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EOCT.

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

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for EOCT and 0.50% for JANP.

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 2.34), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for EOCT and JANP

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer