LOCT vs NOVP
Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October vs PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - November
Which is better, LOCT or NOVP?
NOVP has been ahead.
NOVP has a lower expense ratio. NOVP led over 1Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | LOCT | NOVP |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79% | 0.50%Best |
| AUM | $11M | $36M |
| Dividend Yield | 5.18% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 12 | 8 |
| YTD Return | -0.06% | +10.87%Best |
| 1Y Return | +1.20% | +13.08%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -0.04% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 1.7%Best | 6.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -4.7%Best | -11.8% |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $10,846 | $13,526Best |
| Fund Family | Innovator ETFs Trust | PGIM Investments |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Oct 2, 2023 | May 22, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 22, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.4 years).
LOCT vs NOVP growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.4 years both funds cover.
LOCT vs NOVP Performance
Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust and PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - November (NOVP) is an ETF from PGIM Investments. Over the past year LOCT returned +1.20% while NOVP returned +13.08%. Year to date, LOCT is down 0.06% versus a gain of 10.87% for NOVP.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NOVP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 6.8% compared with 1.7% for LOCT. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -4.7% for LOCT and -11.8% for NOVP. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.78. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LOCT charges 0.79% per year while NOVP charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $50 annually, a gap of $29 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LOCT currently yields 5.18% against 0.00% for NOVP.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of LOCT and NOVP you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, LOCT or NOVP?
LOCT has an expense ratio of 0.79% while NOVP charges 0.50%. NOVP is the cheaper option, by $29 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LOCT or NOVP?
Over the past year LOCT returned +1.20% vs +13.08% for NOVP, so NOVP leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), LOCT annualized +3.44% vs +13.41% for NOVP. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LOCT or NOVP?
NOVP has been the more volatile fund at 6.8% annualized versus 1.7% for LOCT. Worst drawdown: LOCT -4.7% vs NOVP -11.8%.
Should I hold both LOCT and NOVP?
LOCT and NOVP have a monthly-return correlation of 0.78, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, LOCT or NOVP?
LOCT yields 5.18% while NOVP yields 0.00%, so LOCT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NOVP better than LOCT?
NOVP has a lower expense ratio. NOVP led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.