PAUG vs. EOCT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PAUG (Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - August) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both exchange-traded funds - PAUG is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 15% Buffer Protect August Series Index, while EOCT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator. PAUG is passively managed, while EOCT is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PAUG returned 14.12%/yr vs 13.31%/yr for EOCT. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PAUG charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

PAUG vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - August (PAUG) 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, PAUG achieves a 4.86% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 6.94% return.

PAUG

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: 4.86%
• 6M: 4.63%
• 1Y: 14.12%
• 3Y*: 14.12%
• 5Y*: 9.10%
• 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)

PAUG vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PAUG Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - August	4.86%	12.34%	15.37%	17.71%	-6.85%	4.16%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	6.94%	22.03%	9.66%	6.26%	-10.75%	-0.22%

Correlation

The correlation between PAUG and EOCT is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021	0.62

The correlation between PAUG and EOCT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.59 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PAUG vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAUG

PAUG Risk / Return Rank: 87
PAUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
PAUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
PAUG Omega Ratio Rank: 91
PAUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
PAUG Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

PAUG vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - August (PAUG) 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.

	PAUG	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.62	2.46	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.92	3.42	+0.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	1.48	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.58	3.83	-0.25
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.61	15.25	+4.36

PAUG vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAUG Sharpe Ratio is 2.62, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAUG 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

PAUG vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAUG drawdown since its inception was -17.88%, smaller than the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAUG and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAUG	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.88%	-20.35%	+2.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.96%	-5.93%	+1.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.45%	-10.76%	+0.31%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.37%	-1.28%	+0.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.81%	-5.63%	+3.82%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.72%	1.49%	-0.77%

Volatility

PAUG vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - August (PAUG) is 1.05%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) has a volatility of 2.87%. This indicates that PAUG 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

	PAUG	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.05%	2.87%	-1.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.21%	7.09%	-2.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.44%	9.22%	-3.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.72%	11.31%	-2.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.56%	11.31%	-0.75%

PAUG vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAUG has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than EOCT's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAUG vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither PAUG nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PAUG Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - August	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAUG and EOCT in my portfolio?

PAUG and EOCT have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PAUG or EOCT?

EOCT has higher volatility (2.87%) compared to PAUG (1.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAUG dropped -17.88% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, PAUG or EOCT?

On 3-year performance, PAUG leads with 14.12% vs 13.31% for EOCT. On fees, PAUG is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, PAUG has been the lower-risk option at 1.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAUG or EOCT?

Over the 3-year period, PAUG has performed better with a 14.12% return vs 13.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAUG or EOCT?

PAUG is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EOCT.

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

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

What is the main difference between PAUG and EOCT?

PAUG is categorized as Defined Outcome, while EOCT is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for PAUG and 0.89% for EOCT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PAUG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 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.