QTOC vs. BUFF

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

QTOC (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October) and BUFF (Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QTOC is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Innovator, while BUFF is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Refinitiv Laddered Power Buffer Strategy Index. QTOC is actively managed, while BUFF is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, QTOC returned 18.31%/yr vs 11.96%/yr for BUFF. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QTOC charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for BUFF.

Performance

QTOC vs. BUFF - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QTOC achieves a 9.53% return, which is significantly higher than BUFF's 5.01% return.

QTOC

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -0.37%
• YTD: 9.53%
• 6M: 8.58%
• 1Y: 18.87%
• 3Y*: 18.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFF

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 5.01%
• 6M: 4.59%
• 1Y: 12.48%
• 3Y*: 11.96%
• 5Y*: 8.49%
• 10Y*: —

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

QTOC vs. BUFF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QTOC Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October	9.53%	16.79%	14.90%	38.43%	-29.84%	7.47%
BUFF Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF	5.01%	11.02%	12.05%	16.51%	-4.44%	3.18%

Correlation

The correlation between QTOC and BUFF is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2021	0.84

The correlation between QTOC and BUFF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.78 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QTOC vs. BUFF — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTOC

QTOC Risk / Return Rank: 53
QTOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 49
QTOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
QTOC Omega Ratio Rank: 58
QTOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
QTOC Martin Ratio Rank: 61

BUFF

BUFF Risk / Return Rank: 85
BUFF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BUFF Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
BUFF Omega Ratio Rank: 88
BUFF Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
BUFF Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

QTOC vs. BUFF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October (QTOC) and Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF (BUFF). 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.

	QTOC	BUFF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.50	2.41	-0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.19	3.59	-1.41
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.49	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.97	3.50	-1.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.51	18.19	-8.68

QTOC vs. BUFF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTOC Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is lower than the BUFF Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTOC and BUFF, 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

QTOC vs. BUFF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTOC drawdown since its inception was -33.43%, smaller than the maximum BUFF drawdown of -46.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTOC and BUFF.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTOC	BUFF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.43%	-46.23%	+12.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.63%	-3.58%	-6.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.24%	-10.24%	-11.00%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-10.24%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.43%	-0.65%	-0.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.40%	-6.15%	-2.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.99%	0.69%	+1.30%

Volatility

QTOC vs. BUFF - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October (QTOC) has a higher volatility of 3.07% compared to Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF (BUFF) at 1.73%. This indicates that QTOC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QTOC	BUFF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.07%	1.73%	+1.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.42%	4.10%	+6.32%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.64%	5.23%	+7.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.69%	8.44%	+11.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.69%	17.63%	+2.06%

QTOC vs. BUFF - Expense Ratio Comparison

QTOC has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFF's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

QTOC vs. BUFF - Dividend Comparison

Neither QTOC nor BUFF has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BUFF Innovator Laddered Allocation Power Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.78%	1.26%	1.74%	1.55%	0.18%
QTOC Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTOC and BUFF in my portfolio?

QTOC and BUFF have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QTOC or BUFF?

QTOC has higher volatility (3.07%) compared to BUFF (1.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTOC dropped -33.43% vs BUFF's -46.23%.

Which ETF is better, QTOC or BUFF?

On 3-year performance, QTOC leads with 18.31% vs 11.96% for BUFF. On fees, QTOC is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, BUFF has been the lower-risk option at 1.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QTOC or BUFF?

Over the 3-year period, QTOC has performed better with a 18.31% return vs 11.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTOC or BUFF?

QTOC is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for BUFF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QTOC or BUFF?

QTOC and BUFF have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QTOC and BUFF?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 1.50), 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.