QTOC vs. FEBP

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

QTOC (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October) and FEBP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QTOC returned 17.77% vs 15.52% for FEBP. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QTOC charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FEBP.

Performance

QTOC vs. FEBP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October (QTOC) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QTOC achieves a 10.87% return, which is significantly higher than FEBP's 7.42% return.

QTOC

• 1D: -0.48%
• 1M: 0.22%
• 6M: 9.96%
• YTD: 10.87%
• 1Y: 17.77%
• 3Y*: 18.45%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEBP

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 0.53%
• 6M: 6.53%
• YTD: 7.42%
• 1Y: 15.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QTOC vs. FEBP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QTOC Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October	10.87%	16.79%	13.13%
FEBP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February	7.42%	12.06%	11.40%

Correlation

The correlation between QTOC and FEBP is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	0.82

The correlation between QTOC and FEBP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.86 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

QTOC vs. FEBP — 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: 50
QTOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
QTOC Omega Ratio Rank: 58
QTOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
QTOC Martin Ratio Rank: 63

FEBP

FEBP Risk / Return Rank: 68
FEBP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
FEBP Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
FEBP Omega Ratio Rank: 82
FEBP Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
FEBP Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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. FEBP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October (QTOC) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). 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	FEBP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.41	1.48	-0.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.06	2.18	-0.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.39	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.85	2.53	-0.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.93	13.55	-4.62

QTOC vs. FEBP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QTOC Sharpe Ratio is 1.41, which is comparable to the FEBP Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QTOC and FEBP, 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. FEBP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTOC drawdown since its inception was -33.43%, which is greater than FEBP's maximum drawdown of -12.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTOC and FEBP.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTOC	FEBP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.43%	-12.11%	-21.32%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.63%	-6.16%	-3.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.24%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.60%	-0.21%	-0.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.30%	-0.91%	-7.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.99%	1.15%	+0.84%

Volatility

QTOC vs. FEBP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - October (QTOC) is 2.37%, while PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) has a volatility of 8.11%. This indicates that QTOC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEBP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QTOC	FEBP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.37%	8.11%	-5.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.47%	9.72%	+0.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.69%	10.53%	+2.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.58%	10.23%	+9.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.58%	10.23%	+9.35%

QTOC vs. FEBP - Expense Ratio Comparison

QTOC has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than FEBP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

QTOC vs. FEBP - Dividend Comparison

Neither QTOC nor FEBP has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTOC and FEBP in my portfolio?

QTOC and FEBP have a correlation of 0.86, 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 FEBP?

FEBP has higher volatility (8.11%) compared to QTOC (2.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QTOC dropped -33.43% vs FEBP's -12.11%.

Which ETF is better, QTOC or FEBP?

On 1-year performance, QTOC leads with 17.77% vs 15.52% for FEBP. On fees, FEBP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QTOC has been the lower-risk option at 2.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QTOC or FEBP?

Over the 1-year period, QTOC has performed better with a 17.77% return vs 15.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTOC or FEBP?

FEBP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QTOC.

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

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

What is the main difference between QTOC and FEBP?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QTOC and 0.50% for FEBP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs 1.41), 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.