PSFO vs. EOCT

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PSFO (Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF) and EOCT (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PSFO returned 13.26%/yr vs 13.40%/yr for EOCT. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PSFO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EOCT.

Performance

PSFO vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) 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, PSFO achieves a 6.82% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 7.70% return.

PSFO

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 2.38%
• YTD: 6.82%
• 6M: 7.58%
• 1Y: 18.36%
• 3Y*: 13.26%
• 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)

PSFO vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PSFO Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF	6.82%	12.93%	10.78%	20.03%	-0.34%	4.75%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	7.70%	22.03%	9.66%	6.26%	-10.75%	-0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between PSFO and EOCT is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2021	0.59

The correlation between PSFO and EOCT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

PSFO vs. EOCT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PSFO	EOCT
Technology	36.2%	37.0%
Financial Services	11.9%	19.4%
Communication Services	10.9%	6.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	9.6%
Healthcare	8.4%	2.9%
Industrials	8.1%	7.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	3.0%
Energy	3.5%	4.0%
Utilities	2.3%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.1%
Basic Materials	1.8%	6.5%

Return for Risk

PSFO vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSFO

PSFO Risk / Return Rank: 79
PSFO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
PSFO Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
PSFO Omega Ratio Rank: 81
PSFO Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
PSFO Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

PSFO vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) 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.

	PSFO	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.53	2.80	-0.27
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.67	3.92	-0.25
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.54	-0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.65	4.28	-0.64
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	17.72	17.18	+0.54
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSFO vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSFO Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSFO 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

	PSFO	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.53	2.80	-0.27
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.17	0.61	+0.56

Drawdowns

PSFO vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSFO drawdown since its inception was -12.09%, smaller than the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSFO and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSFO	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.09%	-20.35%	+8.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.20%	-5.93%	+0.73%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.09%	-10.76%	-1.33%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.22%	+0.22%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.75%	-5.69%	+3.94%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.07%	1.47%	-0.40%

Volatility

PSFO vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF (PSFO) is 1.06%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) has a volatility of 1.78%. This indicates that PSFO 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

	PSFO	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.06%	1.78%	-0.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.50%	6.69%	-1.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.30%	9.06%	-1.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.06%	11.31%	-1.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.06%	11.31%	-1.25%

PSFO vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSFO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than EOCT's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSFO vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither PSFO nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSFO and EOCT in my portfolio?

PSFO and EOCT have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSFO or EOCT?

EOCT has higher volatility (1.78%) compared to PSFO (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSFO dropped -12.09% vs EOCT's -20.35%.

Which ETF is better, PSFO or EOCT?

On 3-year performance, EOCT leads with 13.40% vs 13.26% for PSFO. On fees, PSFO is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, PSFO has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSFO or EOCT?

Over the 3-year period, EOCT has performed better with a 13.40% return vs 13.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSFO or EOCT?

PSFO is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EOCT.

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

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

What is the main difference between PSFO and EOCT?

They also come from different issuers: Pacer and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PSFO and 0.89% for EOCT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.80 vs 2.53), 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.