NVBT vs. EOCT

Last updated Aug 5, 2026

NVBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, NVBT returned 12.21%/yr vs 12.92%/yr for EOCT. Their 0.60 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. NVBT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

NVBT vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT) 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, NVBT achieves a 10.00% return, which is significantly higher than EOCT's 9.00% return.

NVBT

• 1D: 0.99%
• 1M: 2.58%
• 6M: 9.10%
• YTD: 10.00%
• 1Y: 16.19%
• 3Y*: 12.21%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 13.48%

EOCT

• 1D: 0.59%
• 1M: 1.95%
• 6M: 5.22%
• YTD: 9.00%
• 1Y: 21.52%
• 3Y*: 12.92%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.89%

*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	$211.18K	$179.87K	$289.70K
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	$37.90K	$70.18K	$49.93K

NVBT vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
NVBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF	10.00%	12.84%	12.03%	16.28%	-0.56%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	9.00%	22.03%	9.66%	6.26%	8.24%

Correlation

The correlation between NVBT and EOCT is 0.71, 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.	0.71
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 1, 2022	0.60

The correlation between NVBT and EOCT shifts across timeframes, from 0.60 (all time) to 0.71 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

NVBT vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

NVBT

NVBT Risk / Return Rank: 76
NVBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
NVBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
NVBT Omega Ratio Rank: 78
NVBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
NVBT Martin Ratio Rank: 83

EOCT

EOCT Risk / Return Rank: 88
EOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
EOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
EOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

NVBT vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	NVBT	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	2.35	-0.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.78	3.27	-0.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.45	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.62	3.65	-1.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.39	14.65	-2.26

NVBT vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NVBT Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NVBT 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

NVBT vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NVBT drawdown since its inception was -12.90%, smaller than the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NVBT and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	NVBT	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.90%	-20.35%	+7.45%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.21%	-5.93%	-0.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.90%	-8.54%	-4.36%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.33%	-5.52%	+4.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.31%	1.47%	-0.16%

Volatility

NVBT vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Nov ETF (NVBT) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) have volatilities of 2.79% and 2.69%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NVBT	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.79%	2.69%	+0.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.03%	7.35%	-0.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.45%	9.21%	-0.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.32%	11.25%	-0.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.32%	11.25%	-0.93%

NVBT vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

NVBT vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither NVBT nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NVBT and EOCT in my portfolio?

NVBT and EOCT have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NVBT or EOCT?

NVBT has higher volatility (2.79%) compared to EOCT (2.69%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NVBT dropped -12.90% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, NVBT or EOCT?

On 3-year performance, EOCT leads with 12.92% vs 12.21% for NVBT. On fees, NVBT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, EOCT has been the lower-risk option at 2.69%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NVBT or EOCT?

Over the 3-year period, EOCT has performed better with a 12.92% return vs 12.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NVBT or EOCT?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between NVBT and EOCT?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 1.94), 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.