IJUL vs. EOCT

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

IJUL (Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - July) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both exchange-traded funds - IJUL is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the MSCI EAFE Index, while EOCT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator. IJUL is passively managed, while EOCT is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IJUL returned 11.71%/yr vs 13.80%/yr for EOCT. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IJUL charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

IJUL vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IJUL achieves a 6.94% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 8.33% return.

IJUL

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 1.68%
• YTD: 6.94%
• 6M: 7.42%
• 1Y: 16.33%
• 3Y*: 11.71%
• 5Y*: 7.98%
• 10Y*: —

EOCT

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

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

IJUL vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IJUL Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - July	6.94%	20.98%	2.12%	13.77%	-2.77%	1.16%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	8.33%	22.03%	9.66%	6.26%	-10.75%	-0.22%

Correlation

The correlation between IJUL and EOCT is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021	0.72

The correlation between IJUL and EOCT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IJUL vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

IJUL

IJUL Risk / Return Rank: 67
IJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
IJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
IJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 69
IJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
IJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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

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.

IJUL vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - July (IJUL) 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.

	IJUL	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	2.71	-0.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.01	3.76	-0.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.53	-0.13
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	4.16	-1.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.50	16.60	-4.09

IJUL vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IJUL and EOCT, 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

IJUL vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IJUL drawdown since its inception was -21.09%, roughly equal to the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IJUL and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	IJUL	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.09%	-20.35%	-0.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.35%	-5.93%	+0.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.27%	-10.76%	+2.49%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.59%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.53%	-5.64%	+3.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.31%	1.48%	-0.17%

Volatility

IJUL vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - July (IJUL) is 2.17%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) has a volatility of 2.52%. This indicates that IJUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EOCT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IJUL	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.17%	2.52%	-0.35%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.32%	6.99%	-0.67%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.97%	9.13%	-1.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.88%	11.30%	-1.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.06%	11.30%	-0.24%

IJUL vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

IJUL has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than EOCT's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

IJUL vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither IJUL nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IJUL Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - July	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IJUL and EOCT in my portfolio?

IJUL and EOCT have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IJUL or EOCT?

EOCT has higher volatility (2.52%) compared to IJUL (2.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IJUL dropped -21.09% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, IJUL or EOCT?

On 3-year performance, EOCT leads with 13.80% vs 11.71% for IJUL. On fees, IJUL is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, IJUL has been the lower-risk option at 2.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IJUL or EOCT?

Over the 3-year period, EOCT has performed better with a 13.80% return vs 11.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IJUL or EOCT?

IJUL is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EOCT.

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

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

What is the main difference between IJUL and EOCT?

IJUL is categorized as Defined Outcome, while EOCT is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for IJUL and 0.89% for EOCT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.71 vs 2.06), 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.