XBOC vs. XBJA

Last updated Jun 21, 2026

XBOC (Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October) and XBJA (Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January) are both Defined Outcome funds from Innovator. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XBOC returned 11.41%/yr vs 11.44%/yr for XBJA. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.79% expense ratio.

Performance

XBOC vs. XBJA - 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 U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with XBOC having a 5.50% return and XBJA slightly lower at 5.46%.

XBOC

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: 0.61%
• YTD: 5.50%
• 6M: 5.73%
• 1Y: 13.54%
• 3Y*: 11.41%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XBJA

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 0.52%
• YTD: 5.46%
• 6M: 5.59%
• 1Y: 14.13%
• 3Y*: 11.44%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XBOC vs. XBJA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
XBOC Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October	5.50%	11.15%	8.36%	20.06%	-7.58%
XBJA Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January	5.46%	11.12%	11.68%	17.62%	-11.58%

Correlation

The correlation between XBOC and XBJA 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 (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2022	0.89

The correlation between XBOC and XBJA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

XBOC vs. XBJA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XBOC	XBJA
Technology	38.4%	38.4%
Financial Services	11.0%	11.0%
Communication Services	10.8%	10.8%
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	10.0%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	7.9%	7.9%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	4.6%
Energy	3.2%	3.2%
Utilities	2.1%	2.1%
Real Estate	1.8%	1.8%
Basic Materials	1.7%	1.7%

Return for Risk

XBOC vs. XBJA — Risk / Return Rank

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

XBOC

XBOC Risk / Return Rank: 70
XBOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
XBOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
XBOC Omega Ratio Rank: 79
XBOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
XBOC Martin Ratio Rank: 78

XBJA

XBJA Risk / Return Rank: 78
XBJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
XBJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
XBJA Omega Ratio Rank: 90
XBJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
XBJA Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. XBJA - 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 U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA). 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.

	XBOC	XBJA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.11	2.41	-0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.06	3.52	-0.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.55	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.70	2.66	+0.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.49	15.43	-0.93

XBOC vs. XBJA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBOC Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is comparable to the XBJA Sharpe Ratio of 2.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBOC and XBJA, 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

XBOC vs. XBJA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBOC drawdown since its inception was -13.35%, smaller than the maximum XBJA drawdown of -17.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBOC and XBJA.

Drawdown Indicators

	XBOC	XBJA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.35%	-17.42%	+4.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.99%	-5.33%	+0.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.53%	-12.57%	+0.04%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.23%	-0.15%	-0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.06%	-3.12%	+1.06%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.93%	0.92%	+0.01%

Volatility

XBOC vs. XBJA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - October (XBOC) is 1.38%, while Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - January (XBJA) has a volatility of 1.57%. This indicates that XBOC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than XBJA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XBOC	XBJA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.38%	1.57%	-0.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.30%	5.34%	-0.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.38%	5.91%	+0.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.87%	11.55%	-1.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.87%	11.55%	-1.68%

XBOC vs. XBJA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both XBOC and XBJA have an expense ratio of 0.79%.

Dividends

XBOC vs. XBJA - Dividend Comparison

Neither XBOC nor XBJA has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XBOC and XBJA in my portfolio?

XBOC and XBJA 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, XBOC or XBJA?

XBJA has higher volatility (1.57%) compared to XBOC (1.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBOC dropped -13.35% vs XBJA's -17.42%.

Which ETF is better, XBOC or XBJA?

On 3-year performance, XBJA leads with 11.44% vs 11.41% for XBOC. Both ETFs have the same 0.79% expense ratio. On volatility, XBOC has been the lower-risk option at 1.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XBOC or XBJA?

Over the 3-year period, XBJA has performed better with a 11.44% return vs 11.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XBOC or XBJA?

XBOC and XBJA have the same expense ratio: 0.79% per year.

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

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XBJA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 2.11), 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.