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

Performance

XBOC vs. QFLR - 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 Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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 5.40% return, which is significantly lower than QFLR's 6.90% return.


XBOC

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

QFLR

1D
0.01%
1M
3.99%
YTD
6.90%
6M
5.88%
1Y
26.98%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XBOC vs. QFLR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between XBOC and QFLR is 0.82, 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

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2024

0.76

The correlation between XBOC and QFLR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

XBOC vs. QFLR - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XBOC
QFLR

Technology

36.2%
50.8%

Financial Services

11.9%
0.9%

Communication Services

10.9%
18.4%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
12.1%

Healthcare

8.4%
3.2%

Industrials

8.1%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
9.2%

Energy

3.5%
1.1%

Utilities

2.3%
1.5%

Real Estate

1.9%

-

Basic Materials

1.8%
0.0%

Technology

XBOC
36.2%
QFLR
50.8%

Financial Services

XBOC
11.9%
QFLR
0.9%

Communication Services

XBOC
10.9%
QFLR
18.4%

Consumer Cyclical

XBOC
10.1%
QFLR
12.1%

Healthcare

XBOC
8.4%
QFLR
3.2%

Industrials

XBOC
8.1%
QFLR
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

XBOC
4.9%
QFLR
9.2%

Energy

XBOC
3.5%
QFLR
1.1%

Utilities

XBOC
2.3%
QFLR
1.5%

Real Estate

XBOC
1.9%
QFLR

-

Basic Materials

XBOC
1.8%
QFLR
0.0%

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. QFLR — Risk / Return Rank

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

XBOC
XBOC Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
XBOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XBOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
XBOC Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
XBOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
XBOC Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank

QFLR
QFLR Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
QFLR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QFLR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
QFLR Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
QFLR Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
QFLR Martin Ratio Rank: 7878
Martin Ratio Rank
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. QFLR - 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 Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR). 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.


XBOCQFLRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.26

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.14

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.46

1.44

+0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.75

3.56

-0.81

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.85

15.19

-0.34

XBOC vs. QFLR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBOC Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is comparable to the QFLR Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBOC and QFLR, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XBOCQFLRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.15

2.41

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.86

1.40

-0.54

Drawdowns

XBOC vs. QFLR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBOC drawdown since its inception was -13.35%, roughly equal to the maximum QFLR drawdown of -13.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBOC and QFLR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XBOCQFLRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.35%

-13.97%

+0.62%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.99%

-7.61%

+2.62%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.11%

-0.48%

+0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.08%

-2.50%

+0.42%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.92%

1.78%

-0.86%

Volatility

XBOC vs. QFLR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October (XBOC) is 0.78%, while Innovator Nasdaq-100 Managed Floor ETF (QFLR) has a volatility of 2.53%. This indicates that XBOC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QFLR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XBOCQFLRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.78%

2.53%

-1.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.19%

8.05%

-2.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.41%

11.28%

-4.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.90%

12.62%

-2.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.90%

12.62%

-2.72%

XBOC vs. QFLR - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBOC has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than QFLR's 0.89% expense ratio.


Dividends

XBOC vs. QFLR - Dividend Comparison

Neither XBOC nor QFLR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Frequently Asked Questions


XBOC and QFLR have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QFLR has higher volatility (2.53%) compared to XBOC (0.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBOC dropped -13.35% vs QFLR's -13.97%.

On 1-year performance, QFLR leads with 26.98% vs 13.69% for XBOC. 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.

Over the 1-year period, QFLR has performed better with a 26.98% return vs 13.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

XBOC is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for QFLR.

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

XBOC is categorized as Defined Outcome, while QFLR is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for XBOC and 0.89% for QFLR.

QFLR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 2.15), 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 QFLR

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