PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XBOC vs. FBUF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

XBOC vs. FBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October (XBOC) and Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBOC achieves a 7.12% return, which is significantly lower than FBUF's 7.94% return.


XBOC

1D
0.28%
1M
1.15%
6M
6.07%
YTD
7.12%
1Y
12.32%
3Y*
11.62%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
8.61%

FBUF

1D
0.65%
1M
3.11%
6M
5.93%
YTD
7.94%
1Y
19.00%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
14.25%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$202.49K$184.01K$259.55K
$65.44K$75.93K$80.56K

XBOC vs. FBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between XBOC and FBUF is 0.88, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2024

0.84

The correlation between XBOC and FBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

XBOC vs. FBUF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

XBOC
XBOC Risk / Return Rank: 7878
Overall Rank
XBOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7777
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XBOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
XBOC Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
XBOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
XBOC Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

FBUF
FBUF Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
FBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8787
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
FBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

XBOC vs. FBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October (XBOC) and Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). 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.


XBOCFBUFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.24

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.41

1.44

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.48

3.40

-0.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.26

14.19

-0.94

XBOC vs. FBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBOC Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the FBUF Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBOC and FBUF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

XBOC vs. FBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBOC drawdown since its inception was -13.35%, which is greater than FBUF's maximum drawdown of -11.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBOC and FBUF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XBOCFBUFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.35%

-11.09%

-2.26%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.99%

-5.61%

+0.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.01%

-1.34%

-0.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.93%

1.34%

-0.41%

Volatility

XBOC vs. FBUF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October (XBOC) is 1.19%, while Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) has a volatility of 2.89%. This indicates that XBOC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XBOCFBUFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.19%

2.89%

-1.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.14%

6.41%

-1.27%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.40%

8.46%

-2.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.76%

9.66%

+0.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.76%

9.66%

+0.10%

XBOC vs. FBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBOC has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than FBUF's 0.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

XBOC vs. FBUF - Dividend Comparison

XBOC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.57%.


Frequently Asked Questions


XBOC and FBUF have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FBUF has higher volatility (2.89%) compared to XBOC (1.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBOC dropped -13.35% vs FBUF's -11.09%.

On 1-year performance, FBUF leads with 19.00% vs 12.32% for XBOC. On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, XBOC has been the lower-risk option at 1.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FBUF has performed better with a 19.00% return vs 12.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for XBOC.

FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.57%, compared with 0.00% for XBOC.

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for XBOC and 0.48% for FBUF.

FBUF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.94), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for XBOC and FBUF

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer