QTJA vs. EOCT

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT).

QTJA and EOCT are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. QTJA is an actively managed fund by Innovator. It was launched on Dec 31, 2021. EOCT is an actively managed fund by Innovator. It was launched on Sep 30, 2021.

Performance

QTJA vs. EOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

QTJA vs. EOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
QTJA Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January	-3.69%	18.86%	18.47%	25.56%	-34.58%
EOCT Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October	1.54%	22.03%	9.66%	6.26%	-11.13%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QTJA achieves a -3.69% return, which is significantly lower than EOCT's 1.54% return.

QTJA

• 1D: 1.00%
• 1M: -3.14%
• YTD: -3.69%
• 6M: -0.80%
• 1Y: 21.22%
• 3Y*: 14.42%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EOCT

• 1D: 0.62%
• 1M: -2.72%
• YTD: 1.54%
• 6M: 3.45%
• 1Y: 20.63%
• 3Y*: 11.56%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QTJA vs. EOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

EOCT

Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October

QTJA

Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January

Return for Risk

QTJA vs. EOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTJA

QTJA Risk / Return Rank: 63
QTJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
QTJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
QTJA Omega Ratio Rank: 75
QTJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
QTJA Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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: 89
EOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

QTJA vs. EOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) 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.

	QTJA	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.99	1.97	-0.98
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.64	2.76	-1.12
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.40	-0.10
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.57	3.15	-1.58
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.44	12.96	-4.53
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QTJA vs. EOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTJA Sharpe Ratio is 0.99, which is lower than the EOCT Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTJA 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

	QTJA	EOCT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.99	1.97	-0.98
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.13	0.50	-0.38

Correlation

The correlation between QTJA and EOCT is 0.58, 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

QTJA vs. EOCT - Dividend Comparison

Neither QTJA nor EOCT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

QTJA vs. EOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTJA drawdown since its inception was -36.07%, which is greater than EOCT's maximum drawdown of -20.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTJA and EOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTJA	EOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.07%	-20.35%	-15.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.12%	-6.57%	-7.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.64%	-3.63%	-2.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-13.80%	-5.88%	-7.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.62%	1.60%	+1.02%

Volatility

QTJA vs. EOCT - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) has a higher volatility of 6.54% compared to Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - October (EOCT) at 4.43%. This indicates that QTJA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EOCT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QTJA	EOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.54%	4.43%	+2.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.88%	6.63%	+2.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.47%	10.49%	+10.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.75%	11.41%	+9.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.75%	11.41%	+9.34%