NOCT vs. TMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NOCT (Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - October) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. NOCT is actively managed, while TMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, NOCT returned 17.36% vs 28.83% for TMAR. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NOCT charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.

Performance

NOCT vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - October (NOCT) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NOCT achieves a 7.61% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 14.45% return.

NOCT

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 2.54%
• YTD: 7.61%
• 6M: 7.69%
• 1Y: 17.36%
• 3Y*: 14.98%
• 5Y*: 10.46%
• 10Y*: —

TMAR

• 1D: -0.72%
• 1M: 2.73%
• YTD: 14.45%
• 6M: 15.92%
• 1Y: 28.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NOCT vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NOCT Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - October	7.61%	13.66%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	14.45%	14.71%

Correlation

The correlation between NOCT and TMAR is 0.62, 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	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025	0.61

The correlation between NOCT and TMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NOCT vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

NOCT

NOCT Risk / Return Rank: 71
NOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
NOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
NOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 78
NOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
NOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 74

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 94
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

NOCT vs. TMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - October (NOCT) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.

	NOCT	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.31	3.06	-0.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.26	4.63	-1.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.77	-0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.99	7.95	-4.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	13.90	38.42	-24.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NOCT vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NOCT Sharpe Ratio is 2.31, which is comparable to the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.06. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NOCT and TMAR, 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

	NOCT	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.31	3.06	-0.75
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.01	2.25	-1.25

Drawdowns

NOCT vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NOCT drawdown since its inception was -16.21%, which is greater than TMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NOCT and TMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	NOCT	TMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.21%	-9.93%	-6.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.84%	-3.64%	-2.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.70%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.21%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.16%	-0.72%	+0.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.34%	-0.66%	-1.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.25%	0.75%	+0.50%

Volatility

NOCT vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - October (NOCT) is 1.01%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 4.53%. This indicates that NOCT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NOCT	TMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.01%	4.53%	-3.52%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.90%	8.17%	-2.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.55%	9.47%	-1.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.93%	11.42%	-0.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.19%	11.42%	-0.23%

NOCT vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

NOCT has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

NOCT vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither NOCT nor TMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
NOCT Innovator Growth-100 Power Buffer ETF - October	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.07%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NOCT and TMAR in my portfolio?

NOCT and TMAR have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NOCT or TMAR?

TMAR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to NOCT (1.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NOCT dropped -16.21% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

Which ETF is better, NOCT or TMAR?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 28.83% vs 17.36% for NOCT. On fees, NOCT is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, NOCT has been the lower-risk option at 1.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NOCT or TMAR?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 28.83% return vs 17.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NOCT or TMAR?

NOCT is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NOCT or TMAR?

NOCT and TMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between NOCT and TMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for NOCT and 0.95% for TMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 vs 2.31), 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.