MART vs. EOCT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MART (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MART returned 15.49%/yr vs 13.31%/yr for EOCT. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MART charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

MART vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MART having a 7.12% return and EOCT slightly lower at 6.94%.

MART

• 1D: -0.75%
• 1M: -0.26%
• YTD: 7.12%
• 6M: 7.01%
• 1Y: 17.70%
• 3Y*: 15.49%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EOCT

• 1D: -1.28%
• 1M: 0.17%
• YTD: 6.94%
• 6M: 7.59%
• 1Y: 22.61%
• 3Y*: 13.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MART vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MART Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF	7.12%	14.93%	15.60%	16.61%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	6.94%	22.03%	9.66%	4.55%

Correlation

The correlation between MART and EOCT is 0.68, 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	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2023	0.61

The correlation between MART and EOCT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MART vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

MART

MART Risk / Return Rank: 84
MART Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
MART Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
MART Omega Ratio Rank: 88
MART Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
MART Martin Ratio Rank: 89

EOCT

EOCT Risk / Return Rank: 83
EOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
EOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
EOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
EOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
EOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

MART vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) 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.

	MART	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.47	2.46	0.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.59	3.42	+0.16
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.48	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.35	3.83	-0.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.30	15.25	+3.05

MART vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MART Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MART 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

MART vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MART drawdown since its inception was -11.61%, smaller than the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MART and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MART	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.61%	-20.35%	+8.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.30%	-5.93%	+0.63%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.61%	-10.76%	-0.85%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.31%	-1.28%	-0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.90%	-5.63%	+4.73%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.97%	1.49%	-0.52%

Volatility

MART vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) is 2.35%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) has a volatility of 2.87%. This indicates that MART 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

	MART	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.35%	2.87%	-0.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.97%	7.09%	-1.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.24%	9.22%	-1.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.69%	11.31%	-1.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.69%	11.31%	-1.62%

MART vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

MART vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither MART nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MART and EOCT in my portfolio?

MART and EOCT have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MART or EOCT?

EOCT has higher volatility (2.87%) compared to MART (2.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MART dropped -11.61% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, MART or EOCT?

On 3-year performance, MART leads with 15.49% vs 13.31% for EOCT. On fees, MART is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, MART has been the lower-risk option at 2.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MART or EOCT?

Over the 3-year period, MART has performed better with a 15.49% return vs 13.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MART or EOCT?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between MART and EOCT?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MART currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 2.46), 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.