MSTQ vs. EOCT

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

MSTQ (LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MSTQ returned 19.31%/yr vs 12.70%/yr for EOCT. Their 0.60 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. MSTQ charges 1.59%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

MSTQ vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) 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, MSTQ achieves a 9.61% return, which is significantly higher than EOCT's 8.37% return.

MSTQ

• 1D: 1.90%
• 1M: -1.94%
• 6M: 8.40%
• YTD: 9.61%
• 1Y: 19.01%
• 3Y*: 19.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.98%

EOCT

• 1D: 0.40%
• 1M: 1.36%
• 6M: 4.89%
• YTD: 8.37%
• 1Y: 21.65%
• 3Y*: 12.70%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.76%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	$201.67K	$173.72K	$286.71K
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	$172.73K	$136.64K	$94.08K

MSTQ vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	9.61%	20.57%	19.58%	43.10%	-21.50%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	8.37%	22.03%	9.66%	6.26%	-2.69%

Correlation

The correlation between MSTQ and EOCT is 0.73, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.73
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 15, 2022	0.60

The correlation between MSTQ and EOCT shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (3 years) to 0.73 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MSTQ vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MSTQ

MSTQ Risk / Return Rank: 40
MSTQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
MSTQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
MSTQ Omega Ratio Rank: 38
MSTQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
MSTQ Martin Ratio Rank: 39

EOCT

EOCT Risk / Return Rank: 89
EOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
EOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
EOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 91
EOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 89

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MSTQ vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) 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.

	MSTQ	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.09	2.37	-1.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.55	3.29	-1.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.19	1.46	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.54	3.67	-2.13
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.17	14.73	-10.57

MSTQ vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSTQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.09, which is lower than the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSTQ 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

MSTQ vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSTQ drawdown since its inception was -31.05%, which is greater than EOCT's maximum drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSTQ and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSTQ	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-31.05%	-20.35%	-10.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.39%	-5.93%	-6.46%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.22%	-8.54%	-6.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.83%	0.00%	-6.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.48%	-5.52%	-2.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.57%	1.47%	+3.10%

Volatility

MSTQ vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF (MSTQ) has a higher volatility of 7.35% compared to Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) at 2.75%. This indicates that MSTQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EOCT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MSTQ	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.35%	2.75%	+4.60%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.31%	7.33%	+6.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.60%	9.21%	+8.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.23%	11.25%	+7.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.23%	11.25%	+7.98%

MSTQ vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSTQ has a 1.59% expense ratio, which is higher than EOCT's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSTQ vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

MSTQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.74%, while EOCT has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MSTQ LHA Market State Tactical Q ETF	12.74%	13.97%	3.72%	0.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSTQ and EOCT in my portfolio?

MSTQ and EOCT have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MSTQ or EOCT?

MSTQ has higher volatility (7.35%) compared to EOCT (2.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSTQ dropped -31.05% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, MSTQ or EOCT?

On 3-year performance, MSTQ leads with 19.31% vs 12.70% for EOCT. On fees, EOCT is cheaper at 0.89% per year. On volatility, EOCT has been the lower-risk option at 2.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MSTQ or EOCT?

Over the 3-year period, MSTQ has performed better with a 19.31% return vs 12.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSTQ or EOCT?

EOCT is cheaper with a 0.89% expense ratio, compared with 1.59% for MSTQ.

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

MSTQ has the higher dividend yield at 12.74%, compared with 0.00% for EOCT.

What is the main difference between MSTQ and EOCT?

They also come from different issuers: Little Harbor Advisors and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 1.59% for MSTQ and 0.89% for EOCT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 vs 1.09), 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.