EOCT vs. PLTM

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) and PLTM (GraniteShares Platinum Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - EOCT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator, while PLTM is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Platinum London PM Fix ($/ozt). EOCT is actively managed, while PLTM is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, EOCT returned 13.80%/yr vs 21.62%/yr for PLTM. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. EOCT charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PLTM.

Performance

EOCT vs. PLTM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) and GraniteShares Platinum Trust (PLTM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EOCT achieves a 8.33% return, which is significantly higher than PLTM's -18.40% return.

EOCT

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 1.48%
• YTD: 8.33%
• 6M: 9.25%
• 1Y: 24.57%
• 3Y*: 13.80%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PLTM

• 1D: -1.17%
• 1M: -12.83%
• YTD: -18.40%
• 6M: -20.69%
• 1Y: 31.86%
• 3Y*: 21.62%
• 5Y*: 8.59%
• 10Y*: —

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

EOCT vs. PLTM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	8.33%	22.03%	9.66%	6.26%	-10.75%	-0.22%
PLTM GraniteShares Platinum Trust	-18.40%	124.46%	-8.91%	-8.10%	10.83%	-0.31%

Correlation

The correlation between EOCT and PLTM is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.41
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021	0.41

Return for Risk

EOCT vs. PLTM — Risk / Return Rank

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

EOCT

EOCT Risk / Return Rank: 85
EOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
EOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
EOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 88
EOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
EOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 84

PLTM

PLTM Risk / Return Rank: 19
PLTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 19
PLTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 20
PLTM Omega Ratio Rank: 22
PLTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
PLTM Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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. PLTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) and GraniteShares Platinum Trust (PLTM). 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.

	EOCT	PLTM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.71	0.62	+2.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.76	1.08	+2.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.15	+0.38
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.16	0.80	+3.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.60	1.76	+14.84

EOCT vs. PLTM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EOCT Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is higher than the PLTM Sharpe Ratio of 0.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EOCT and PLTM, 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

EOCT vs. PLTM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EOCT drawdown since its inception was -20.35%, smaller than the maximum PLTM drawdown of -42.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EOCT and PLTM.

Drawdown Indicators

	EOCT	PLTM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.35%	-42.32%	+21.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.93%	-40.06%	+34.13%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.76%	-40.06%	+29.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-40.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-39.72%	+39.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.64%	-18.65%	+13.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.48%	18.19%	-16.71%

Volatility

EOCT vs. PLTM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) is 2.52%, while GraniteShares Platinum Trust (PLTM) has a volatility of 11.58%. This indicates that EOCT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PLTM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EOCT	PLTM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.52%	11.58%	-9.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.99%	46.02%	-39.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.13%	51.43%	-42.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.30%	32.99%	-21.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.30%	31.10%	-19.80%

EOCT vs. PLTM - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

EOCT vs. PLTM - Dividend Comparison

Neither EOCT nor PLTM has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EOCT and PLTM in my portfolio?

EOCT and PLTM have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EOCT or PLTM?

PLTM has higher volatility (11.58%) compared to EOCT (2.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EOCT dropped -20.35% vs PLTM's -42.32%.

Which ETF is better, EOCT or PLTM?

On 3-year performance, PLTM leads with 21.62% vs 13.80% for EOCT. On fees, PLTM is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, EOCT has been the lower-risk option at 2.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EOCT or PLTM?

Over the 3-year period, PLTM has performed better with a 21.62% return vs 13.80%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EOCT or PLTM?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between EOCT and PLTM?

EOCT is categorized as Options Trading, while PLTM is Precious Metals. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for EOCT and 0.50% for PLTM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 0.62), 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.