XBOC vs. IAPR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XBOC (Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October) and IAPR (Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. XBOC is actively managed, while IAPR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, XBOC returned 11.67%/yr vs 10.13%/yr for IAPR. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XBOC charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for IAPR.

Performance

XBOC vs. IAPR - 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 Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April (IAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBOC achieves a 5.40% return, which is significantly lower than IAPR's 6.91% return.

XBOC

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 1.89%
• YTD: 5.40%
• 6M: 6.20%
• 1Y: 13.69%
• 3Y*: 11.67%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IAPR

• 1D: -0.33%
• 1M: 1.90%
• YTD: 6.91%
• 6M: 8.28%
• 1Y: 14.08%
• 3Y*: 10.13%
• 5Y*: 5.03%
• 10Y*: —

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

XBOC vs. IAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
XBOC Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October	5.40%	11.15%	8.36%	20.06%	-7.58%	3.76%
IAPR Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April	6.91%	15.51%	3.76%	7.67%	-7.61%	1.15%

Correlation

The correlation between XBOC and IAPR is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2021	0.62

The correlation between XBOC and IAPR shifts across timeframes, from 0.55 (3 years) to 0.68 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

XBOC vs. IAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

XBOC

XBOC Risk / Return Rank: 69
XBOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
XBOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
XBOC Omega Ratio Rank: 78
XBOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
XBOC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

IAPR

IAPR Risk / Return Rank: 78
IAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
IAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
IAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 72
IAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
IAPR 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.

XBOC vs. IAPR - 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 Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April (IAPR). 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.

	XBOC	IAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.15	2.12	+0.03
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.12	3.31	-0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.43	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.75	5.51	-2.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.85	21.30	-6.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XBOC vs. IAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBOC Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is comparable to the IAPR Sharpe Ratio of 2.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBOC and IAPR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XBOC	IAPR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.15	2.12	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.57	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.86	0.61	+0.25

Drawdowns

XBOC vs. IAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBOC drawdown since its inception was -13.35%, smaller than the maximum IAPR drawdown of -17.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBOC and IAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	XBOC	IAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.35%	-17.73%	+4.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.99%	-2.56%	-2.43%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.53%	-9.46%	-3.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.73%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.11%	-0.41%	+0.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.08%	-3.88%	+1.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.92%	0.66%	+0.26%

Volatility

XBOC vs. IAPR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October (XBOC) is 0.78%, while Innovator International Developed Power Buffer ETF - April (IAPR) has a volatility of 2.73%. This indicates that XBOC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XBOC	IAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.78%	2.73%	-1.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.19%	5.38%	-0.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.41%	6.68%	-0.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.90%	8.85%	+1.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.90%	8.77%	+1.13%

XBOC vs. IAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBOC has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than IAPR's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBOC vs. IAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither XBOC nor IAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XBOC and IAPR in my portfolio?

XBOC and IAPR have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XBOC or IAPR?

IAPR has higher volatility (2.73%) compared to XBOC (0.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBOC dropped -13.35% vs IAPR's -17.73%.

Which ETF is better, XBOC or IAPR?

On 3-year performance, XBOC leads with 11.67% vs 10.13% for IAPR. On fees, XBOC is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, XBOC has been the lower-risk option at 0.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XBOC or IAPR?

Over the 3-year period, XBOC has performed better with a 11.67% return vs 10.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XBOC or IAPR?

XBOC is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for IAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XBOC or IAPR?

XBOC and IAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between XBOC and IAPR?

Their fees differ too: 0.79% for XBOC and 0.85% for IAPR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XBOC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 2.12), 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.