LOCT vs. COMT

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

LOCT (Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October) and COMT (iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LOCT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator, while COMT is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Dynamic Roll (USD) Total Return Index. LOCT is actively managed, while COMT is passively managed. Over the past year, LOCT returned 5.49% vs 33.20% for COMT. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. LOCT charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for COMT.

Performance

LOCT vs. COMT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT) and iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF (COMT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LOCT achieves a 2.86% return, which is significantly lower than COMT's 30.19% return.

LOCT

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.33%
• 6M: 2.73%
• YTD: 2.86%
• 1Y: 5.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

COMT

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: 2.53%
• 6M: 26.18%
• YTD: 30.19%
• 1Y: 33.20%
• 3Y*: 12.71%
• 5Y*: 11.75%
• 10Y*: 8.33%

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

LOCT vs. COMT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
LOCT Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October	2.86%	5.56%	5.21%	2.86%
COMT iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF	30.19%	6.07%	5.96%	-9.64%

Correlation

The correlation between LOCT and COMT is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2023	-0.03

Return for Risk

LOCT vs. COMT — Risk / Return Rank

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

LOCT

LOCT Risk / Return Rank: 94
LOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
LOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
LOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 96
LOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
LOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 96

COMT

COMT Risk / Return Rank: 52
COMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
COMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
COMT Omega Ratio Rank: 54
COMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
COMT Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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. COMT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT) and iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF (COMT). 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.

	LOCT	COMT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.59	1.55	+1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.95	2.13	+1.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.27	+0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.49	1.90	+2.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.98	6.35	+17.64

LOCT vs. COMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LOCT Sharpe Ratio is 2.59, which is higher than the COMT Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LOCT and COMT, 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

LOCT vs. COMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LOCT drawdown since its inception was -4.69%, smaller than the maximum COMT drawdown of -51.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LOCT and COMT.

Drawdown Indicators

	LOCT	COMT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.69%	-51.89%	+47.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.23%	-17.57%	+16.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-17.57%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.00%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-39.22%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	-11.28%	+11.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.14%	-23.95%	+23.81%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.23%	5.24%	-5.01%

Volatility

LOCT vs. COMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT) is 0.20%, while iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF (COMT) has a volatility of 5.91%. This indicates that LOCT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LOCT	COMT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.20%	5.91%	-5.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.62%	19.67%	-18.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.13%	21.54%	-19.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.52%	21.20%	-17.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.52%	18.85%	-15.33%

LOCT vs. COMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

LOCT has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than COMT's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

LOCT vs. COMT - Dividend Comparison

LOCT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.14%, less than COMT's 5.95% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
COMT iShares GSCI Commodity Dynamic Roll Strategy ETF	5.95%	7.74%	4.90%	5.19%	29.79%	17.79%	0.36%	2.61%	11.65%	5.16%	0.52%	1.44%
LOCT Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October	5.14%	5.12%	6.27%	1.64%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LOCT and COMT in my portfolio?

LOCT and COMT have a correlation of -0.11, 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 COMT?

COMT has higher volatility (5.91%) compared to LOCT (0.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LOCT dropped -4.69% vs COMT's -51.89%.

Which ETF is better, LOCT or COMT?

On 1-year performance, COMT leads with 33.20% vs 5.49% for LOCT. On fees, COMT is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, LOCT has been the lower-risk option at 0.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LOCT or COMT?

Over the 1-year period, COMT has performed better with a 33.20% return vs 5.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LOCT or COMT?

COMT is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for LOCT.

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

COMT has the higher dividend yield at 5.95%, compared with 5.14% for LOCT.

What is the main difference between LOCT and COMT?

LOCT is categorized as Options Trading, while COMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for LOCT and 0.48% for COMT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 1.55), 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.