JUNT vs. EOCT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JUNT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, JUNT returned 14.17%/yr vs 13.40%/yr for EOCT. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JUNT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

JUNT vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT) 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, JUNT achieves a 4.25% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 7.70% return.

JUNT

• 1D: -0.39%
• 1M: 0.54%
• YTD: 4.25%
• 6M: 5.06%
• 1Y: 13.99%
• 3Y*: 14.17%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EOCT

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 1.29%
• YTD: 7.70%
• 6M: 9.20%
• 1Y: 25.27%
• 3Y*: 13.40%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JUNT vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
JUNT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF	4.25%	12.42%	16.03%	10.62%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	7.70%	22.03%	9.66%	2.61%

Correlation

The correlation between JUNT and EOCT is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 2, 2023	0.61

The correlation between JUNT and EOCT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

JUNT vs. EOCT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JUNT	EOCT
Technology	36.2%	37.0%
Financial Services	11.9%	19.4%
Communication Services	10.9%	6.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	9.6%
Healthcare	8.4%	2.9%
Industrials	8.1%	7.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	3.0%
Energy	3.5%	4.0%
Utilities	2.3%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.1%
Basic Materials	1.8%	6.5%

Return for Risk

JUNT vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

JUNT

JUNT Risk / Return Rank: 80
JUNT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
JUNT Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
JUNT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
JUNT Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
JUNT Martin Ratio Rank: 89

EOCT

EOCT Risk / Return Rank: 85
EOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
EOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
EOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 87
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.

JUNT vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT) 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.

	JUNT	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.42	2.80	-0.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.61	3.92	-0.31
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.54	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.45	4.28	-0.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.87	17.18	+2.70
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JUNT vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JUNT Sharpe Ratio is 2.42, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JUNT 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	JUNT	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.42	2.80	-0.38
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.59	0.61	+0.98

Drawdowns

JUNT vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JUNT drawdown since its inception was -12.78%, smaller than the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JUNT and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	JUNT	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.78%	-20.35%	+7.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.08%	-5.93%	+1.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.78%	-10.76%	-2.02%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.39%	-0.22%	-0.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.98%	-5.69%	+4.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.71%	1.47%	-0.76%

Volatility

JUNT vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jun ETF (JUNT) is 0.55%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) has a volatility of 1.78%. This indicates that JUNT 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

	JUNT	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.55%	1.78%	-1.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.37%	6.69%	-2.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.82%	9.06%	-3.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.24%	11.31%	-2.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.24%	11.31%	-2.07%

JUNT vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

JUNT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than EOCT's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

JUNT vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither JUNT nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JUNT and EOCT in my portfolio?

JUNT and EOCT have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JUNT or EOCT?

EOCT has higher volatility (1.78%) compared to JUNT (0.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JUNT dropped -12.78% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, JUNT or EOCT?

On 3-year performance, JUNT leads with 14.17% vs 13.40% for EOCT. On fees, JUNT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, JUNT has been the lower-risk option at 0.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JUNT or EOCT?

Over the 3-year period, JUNT has performed better with a 14.17% return vs 13.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JUNT or EOCT?

JUNT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EOCT.

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

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

What is the main difference between JUNT and EOCT?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for JUNT and 0.89% for EOCT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 2.42), 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.