NBOS vs. EOCT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NBOS (Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NBOS returned 19.19% vs 25.27% for EOCT. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NBOS charges 0.56%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

NBOS vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF (NBOS) 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, NBOS achieves a 6.51% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 7.70% return.

NBOS

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 2.06%
• YTD: 6.51%
• 6M: 7.94%
• 1Y: 19.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 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)

NBOS vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NBOS Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF	6.51%	12.22%	10.99%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	7.70%	22.03%	11.78%

Correlation

The correlation between NBOS and EOCT is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 30, 2024	0.52

The correlation between NBOS and EOCT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NBOS vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

NBOS

NBOS Risk / Return Rank: 84
NBOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
NBOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
NBOS Omega Ratio Rank: 87
NBOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
NBOS Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

NBOS vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF (NBOS) 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.

	NBOS	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.58	2.80	-0.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.62	3.92	-0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.54	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.09	4.28	-0.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.25	17.18	+6.07
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NBOS vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NBOS Sharpe Ratio is 2.58, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NBOS 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

	NBOS	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.58	2.80	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.29	0.61	+0.69

Drawdowns

NBOS vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NBOS drawdown since its inception was -12.66%, smaller than the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NBOS and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	NBOS	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.66%	-20.35%	+7.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.71%	-5.93%	+1.22%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.76%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.17%	-0.22%	+0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.10%	-5.69%	+4.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.83%	1.47%	-0.64%

Volatility

NBOS vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF (NBOS) is 0.84%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) has a volatility of 1.78%. This indicates that NBOS 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

	NBOS	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.84%	1.78%	-0.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.90%	6.69%	-0.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.47%	9.06%	-1.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.96%	11.31%	-1.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.96%	11.31%	-1.35%

NBOS vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

NBOS has a 0.56% expense ratio, which is lower than EOCT's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

NBOS vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

NBOS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.93%, while EOCT has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NBOS Neuberger Berman Option Strategy ETF	7.93%	7.81%	7.32%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NBOS and EOCT in my portfolio?

NBOS and EOCT have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NBOS or EOCT?

EOCT has higher volatility (1.78%) compared to NBOS (0.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NBOS dropped -12.66% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, NBOS or EOCT?

On 1-year performance, EOCT leads with 25.27% vs 19.19% for NBOS. On fees, NBOS is cheaper at 0.56% per year. On volatility, NBOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NBOS or EOCT?

Over the 1-year period, EOCT has performed better with a 25.27% return vs 19.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NBOS or EOCT?

NBOS is cheaper with a 0.56% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EOCT.

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

NBOS has the higher dividend yield at 7.93%, compared with 0.00% for EOCT.

What is the main difference between NBOS and EOCT?

They also come from different issuers: Neuberger Berman and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.56% for NBOS and 0.89% for EOCT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 2.58), 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.