HOCT vs. IMAR
HOCT (Innovator Premium Income 9 Buffer ETF - October) and IMAR (Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds from Innovator. Both are actively managed. HOCT charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for IMAR.
Performance
HOCT vs. IMAR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
HOCT
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.00%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IMAR
- 1D
- -0.24%
- 1M
- 2.14%
- YTD
- 1.43%
- 6M
- 2.92%
- 1Y
- 9.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HOCT vs. IMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
HOCT Innovator Premium Income 9 Buffer ETF - October | 0.00% |
IMAR Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - March | 0.00% |
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
HOCT vs. IMAR — Risk / Return Rank
HOCT
IMAR
HOCT vs. IMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Premium Income 9 Buffer ETF - October (HOCT) and Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - March (IMAR). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HOCT | IMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 1.13 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | — | 0.89 | — |
Drawdowns
HOCT vs. IMAR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HOCT drawdown since its inception was 0.00%, smaller than the maximum IMAR drawdown of -9.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HOCT and IMAR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HOCT | IMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | 0.00% | -9.05% | +9.05% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -6.91% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.77% | +0.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | 0.00% | -1.89% | +1.89% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.78% | — |
Volatility
HOCT vs. IMAR - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HOCT | IMAR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 2.92% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 6.89% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.00% | 7.98% | -7.98% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.00% | 9.35% | -9.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.00% | 9.35% | -9.35% |
HOCT vs. IMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison
HOCT has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than IMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
HOCT vs. IMAR - Dividend Comparison
Neither HOCT nor IMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
On fees, HOCT is cheaper at 0.79% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
HOCT is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for IMAR.
HOCT and IMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
Their fees differ too: 0.79% for HOCT and 0.85% for IMAR.
Find the right allocation for HOCT and IMAR
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