LOCT vs. AMZP

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

LOCT (Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October) and AMZP (Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, LOCT returned 5.71% vs 22.02% for AMZP. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LOCT charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for AMZP.

Performance

LOCT vs. AMZP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT) and Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF (AMZP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LOCT achieves a 2.29% return, which is significantly lower than AMZP's 6.83% return.

LOCT

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 2.29%
• 6M: 2.88%
• 1Y: 5.71%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

AMZP

• 1D: 1.48%
• 1M: -8.36%
• YTD: 6.83%
• 6M: 8.34%
• 1Y: 22.02%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LOCT vs. AMZP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LOCT Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October	2.29%	5.56%	5.21%	1.78%
AMZP Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF	6.83%	9.56%	37.42%	7.73%

Correlation

The correlation between LOCT and AMZP is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2023	0.50

Return for Risk

LOCT vs. AMZP — Risk / Return Rank

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

LOCT

LOCT Risk / Return Rank: 89
LOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
LOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
LOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 94
LOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
LOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 93

AMZP

AMZP Risk / Return Rank: 22
AMZP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
AMZP Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
AMZP Omega Ratio Rank: 23
AMZP Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
AMZP Martin Ratio Rank: 21

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.

LOCT vs. AMZP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT) and Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF (AMZP). 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.

	LOCT	AMZP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	0.76	+1.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.07	1.20	+2.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.65	1.15	+0.50
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.67	0.94	+3.73
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	24.94	2.40	+22.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LOCT vs. AMZP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LOCT Sharpe Ratio is 2.65, which is higher than the AMZP Sharpe Ratio of 0.76. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LOCT and AMZP, 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

	LOCT	AMZP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.65	0.76	+1.89
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.69	0.89	+0.80

Drawdowns

LOCT vs. AMZP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LOCT drawdown since its inception was -4.69%, smaller than the maximum AMZP drawdown of -27.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LOCT and AMZP.

Drawdown Indicators

	LOCT	AMZP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.69%	-27.36%	+22.67%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.23%	-23.64%	+22.41%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.06%	-8.84%	+8.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.14%	-6.03%	+5.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.23%	9.19%	-8.96%

Volatility

LOCT vs. AMZP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT) is 0.22%, while Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF (AMZP) has a volatility of 8.41%. This indicates that LOCT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AMZP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LOCT	AMZP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.22%	8.41%	-8.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.67%	22.22%	-20.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.16%	29.15%	-26.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.59%	26.84%	-23.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.59%	26.84%	-23.25%

LOCT vs. AMZP - Expense Ratio Comparison

LOCT has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than AMZP's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

LOCT vs. AMZP - Dividend Comparison

LOCT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.14%, less than AMZP's 19.24% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
AMZP Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF	19.24%	22.04%	15.15%	2.45%
LOCT Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October	5.14%	5.12%	6.27%	1.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LOCT and AMZP in my portfolio?

LOCT and AMZP have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LOCT or AMZP?

AMZP has higher volatility (8.41%) compared to LOCT (0.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LOCT dropped -4.69% vs AMZP's -27.36%.

Which ETF is better, LOCT or AMZP?

On 1-year performance, AMZP leads with 22.02% vs 5.71% for LOCT. On fees, LOCT is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, LOCT has been the lower-risk option at 0.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LOCT or AMZP?

Over the 1-year period, AMZP has performed better with a 22.02% return vs 5.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LOCT or AMZP?

LOCT is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AMZP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LOCT or AMZP?

AMZP has the higher dividend yield at 19.24%, compared with 5.14% for LOCT.

What is the main difference between LOCT and AMZP?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Kurv. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for LOCT and 0.99% for AMZP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.65 vs 0.76), 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.