PMOC vs. EAPR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PMOC (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - October) and EAPR (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. PMOC is actively managed, while EAPR is passively managed. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PMOC charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EAPR.

Performance

PMOC vs. EAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - October (PMOC) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMOC achieves a 2.77% return, which is significantly lower than EAPR's 9.33% return.

PMOC

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.25%
• YTD: 2.77%
• 6M: 2.75%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EAPR

• 1D: -2.64%
• 1M: -0.09%
• YTD: 9.33%
• 6M: 9.33%
• 1Y: 18.07%
• 3Y*: 9.89%
• 5Y*: 4.84%
• 10Y*: —

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

PMOC vs. EAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PMOC PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - October	2.77%	0.93%
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	9.33%	1.87%

Correlation

The correlation between PMOC and EAPR is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025	0.57

Return for Risk

PMOC vs. EAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PMOC

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

EAPR

EAPR Risk / Return Rank: 84
EAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
EAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
EAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 92
EAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

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.

PMOC vs. EAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - October (PMOC) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). 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.

	PMOC	EAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.09	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.11	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.57	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	4.65	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	25.14	—

Drawdowns

PMOC vs. EAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMOC drawdown since its inception was -1.50%, smaller than the maximum EAPR drawdown of -17.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMOC and EAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PMOC	EAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.50%	-17.65%	+16.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-3.90%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.24%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.65%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-2.64%	+2.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.21%	-4.04%	+3.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.72%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PMOC	EAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.46%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	8.07%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40%	8.68%	-6.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.40%	10.33%	-7.93%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.40%	10.21%	-7.81%

PMOC vs. EAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMOC has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than EAPR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

PMOC vs. EAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PMOC nor EAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PMOC and EAPR in my portfolio?

PMOC and EAPR have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PMOC or EAPR?

On fees, PMOC is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PMOC or EAPR?

PMOC is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PMOC or EAPR?

PMOC and EAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PMOC and EAPR?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMOC and 0.89% for EAPR.