QFLR vs. EOCT

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT).

QFLR and EOCT are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. QFLR is an actively managed fund by Innovator. It was launched on Jan 24, 2024. EOCT is an actively managed fund by Innovator. It was launched on Sep 30, 2021.

Performance

QFLR vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

QFLR vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	-2.86%	17.27%	16.64%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	0.91%	22.03%	12.17%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QFLR achieves a -2.86% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 0.91% return.

QFLR

• 1D: 2.40%
• 1M: -3.49%
• YTD: -2.86%
• 6M: 0.45%
• 1Y: 23.29%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EOCT

• 1D: 1.81%
• 1M: -4.00%
• YTD: 0.91%
• 6M: 2.77%
• 1Y: 19.93%
• 3Y*: 11.33%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QFLR vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both QFLR and EOCT have an expense ratio of 0.89%.

QFLR

Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF

EOCT

Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October

Return for Risk

QFLR vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

QFLR

QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 90
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 88
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

EOCT

EOCT Risk / Return Rank: 90
EOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
EOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 90
EOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
EOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

QFLR vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) 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.

	QFLR	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	1.91	-0.01
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.61	2.67	-0.07
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.39	-0.03
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.03	3.04	-0.02
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.18	12.67	+0.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QFLR vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QFLR Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 1.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QFLR and EOCT, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QFLR	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	1.91	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.09	0.49	+0.60

Correlation

The correlation between QFLR and EOCT is 0.59, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.

Dividends

QFLR vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither QFLR nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

	TTM	2025	2024
QFLR Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF	0.00%	0.02%	0.03%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Drawdowns

QFLR vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QFLR drawdown since its inception was -13.97%, smaller than the maximum EOCT drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QFLR and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	QFLR	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.97%	-20.35%	+6.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.61%	-6.57%	-1.04%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.40%	-4.23%	-1.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.61%	-5.88%	+3.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.75%	1.58%	+0.17%

Volatility

QFLR vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) have volatilities of 4.93% and 4.79%, 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

	QFLR	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.93%	4.79%	+0.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.48%	6.68%	+2.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.31%	10.48%	+1.83%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.90%	11.41%	+1.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.90%	11.41%	+1.49%