FXP vs. EOCT
FXP (ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both exchange-traded funds - FXP is a China Equities fund tracking the FTSE China 50 Net Tax USD (TR) (-200%), while EOCT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator. FXP is passively managed, while EOCT is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, FXP returned -27.96%/yr vs 12.92%/yr for EOCT. Their -0.78 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. FXP charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.
Performance
FXP vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FXP achieves a 6.18% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 9.00% return.
FXP
- 1D
- 0.44%
- 1M
- -23.97%
- 6M
- 9.78%
- YTD
- 6.18%
- 1Y
- -1.26%
- 3Y*
- -27.96%
- 5Y*
- -21.08%
- 10Y*
- -22.22%
- ALL TIME*
- -28.45%
EOCT
- 1D
- 0.59%
- 1M
- 1.95%
- 6M
- 5.22%
- YTD
- 9.00%
- 1Y
- 21.52%
- 3Y*
- 12.92%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 6.89%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $211.18K | $179.87K | $289.70K | |
| $103.24K | $95.91K | $96.09K |
FXP vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 | 6.18% | -45.32% | -52.46% | 12.74% | -11.73% | 4.56% |
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October | 9.00% | 22.03% | 9.66% | 6.26% | -10.75% | -0.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between FXP and EOCT is -0.59, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.59 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | -0.71 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021 | -0.78 |
The correlation between FXP and EOCT shifts across timeframes, from -0.78 (all time) to -0.59 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
FXP vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank
FXP
EOCT
FXP vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) 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.
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.
| FXP | EOCT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 1.45 | -0.43 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.05 | 3.65 | -3.70 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.11 | 14.65 | -14.76 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FXP vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FXP drawdown since its inception was -99.94%, which is greater than EOCT's maximum drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FXP and EOCT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FXP | EOCT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -99.94% | -20.35% | -79.59% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -25.65% | -5.93% | -19.72% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -82.34% | -8.54% | -73.80% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -87.85% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -93.56% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -99.92% | 0.00% | -99.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -94.18% | -5.52% | -88.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.62% | 1.47% | +10.15% |
Volatility
FXP vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison
ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 (FXP) has a higher volatility of 10.97% compared to Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) at 2.69%. This indicates that FXP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EOCT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FXP | EOCT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.97% | 2.69% | +8.28% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 29.41% | 7.35% | +22.06% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 40.60% | 9.21% | +31.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.72% | 11.25% | +51.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.81% | 11.25% | +43.56% |
FXP vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison
FXP has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than EOCT's 0.89% expense ratio.
Dividends
FXP vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison
FXP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.39%, while EOCT has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
FXP ProShares UltraShort FTSE China 50 | 3.39% | 9.57% | 3.55% | 2.20% | 0.06% | 0.00% | 0.06% | 1.20% | 0.16% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FXP and EOCT have a correlation of -0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FXP has higher volatility (10.97%) compared to EOCT (2.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FXP dropped -99.94% vs EOCT's -20.35%.
On 3-year performance, EOCT leads with 12.92% vs -27.96% for FXP. On fees, EOCT is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, EOCT has been the lower-risk option at 2.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, EOCT has performed better with a 12.92% return vs -27.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EOCT is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FXP.
FXP has the higher dividend yield at 3.39%, compared with 0.00% for EOCT.
FXP is categorized as China Equities, while EOCT is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FXP and 0.89% for EOCT.
EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs -0.03), 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.
Find the right allocation for FXP and EOCT
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