IOCT vs. XAPR

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

IOCT (Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF- October) and XAPR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, IOCT returned 13.00% vs 8.98% for XAPR. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.

Performance

IOCT vs. XAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF- October (IOCT) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April (XAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IOCT achieves a 5.42% return, which is significantly higher than XAPR's 3.55% return.

IOCT

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 1.47%
• YTD: 5.42%
• 6M: 7.04%
• 1Y: 13.00%
• 3Y*: 12.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XAPR

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 1.57%
• YTD: 3.55%
• 6M: 4.29%
• 1Y: 8.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IOCT vs. XAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IOCT Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF- October	5.42%	18.96%	3.04%
XAPR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April	3.55%	12.57%	8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between IOCT and XAPR is 0.63, 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	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 23, 2024	0.63

The correlation between IOCT and XAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IOCT vs. XAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

IOCT

IOCT Risk / Return Rank: 44
IOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
IOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
IOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 40
IOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 47
IOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 52

XAPR

XAPR Risk / Return Rank: 98
XAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
XAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
XAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
XAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
XAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

IOCT vs. XAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF- October (IOCT) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April (XAPR). 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.

	IOCT	XAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.48	4.42	-2.94
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.17	7.52	-5.35
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	2.11	-0.84
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.38	14.03	-11.65
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.02	74.48	-65.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IOCT vs. XAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IOCT Sharpe Ratio is 1.48, which is lower than the XAPR Sharpe Ratio of 4.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IOCT and XAPR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IOCT	XAPR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.48	4.42	-2.94
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.91	1.90	-0.98

Drawdowns

IOCT vs. XAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IOCT drawdown since its inception was -16.94%, which is greater than XAPR's maximum drawdown of -6.18%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IOCT and XAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	IOCT	XAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.94%	-6.18%	-10.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.84%	-0.66%	-5.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.54%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.67%	-0.18%	-2.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.54%	0.12%	+1.42%

Volatility

IOCT vs. XAPR - Volatility Comparison

Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF- October (IOCT) has a higher volatility of 2.31% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April (XAPR) at 0.78%. This indicates that IOCT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IOCT	XAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.31%	0.78%	+1.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.44%	1.30%	+5.14%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.85%	2.05%	+6.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.36%	6.18%	+3.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.36%	6.18%	+3.18%

IOCT vs. XAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IOCT and XAPR have an expense ratio of 0.85%.

Dividends

IOCT vs. XAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither IOCT nor XAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IOCT and XAPR in my portfolio?

IOCT and XAPR have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IOCT or XAPR?

IOCT has higher volatility (2.31%) compared to XAPR (0.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IOCT dropped -16.94% vs XAPR's -6.18%.

Which ETF is better, IOCT or XAPR?

On 1-year performance, IOCT leads with 13.00% vs 8.98% for XAPR. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. On volatility, XAPR has been the lower-risk option at 0.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IOCT or XAPR?

Over the 1-year period, IOCT has performed better with a 13.00% return vs 8.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IOCT or XAPR?

IOCT and XAPR have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IOCT or XAPR?

IOCT and XAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between IOCT and XAPR?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and FT Vest.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.42 vs 1.48), 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.