Data as of .
LJAN vs LOCT: which paid, and which earned it?
Over the year LOCT paid 5.2% of its price in cash against LJAN’s 4.9% and the two finished level on total return.
ETFIQ Return Stability Score: LOCT scores higher
Was the payout funded by returns, or by your own capital?
A percentile among the 173 income ETFs writing on an index or proxy. It is a position in a set, not a rating, and neither end of it is a recommendation. All income ETFs ranked by it · How it is computed
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, LJAN and LOCT hold 98% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | LJAN | LOCT |
|---|---|---|
| TREASURY BILL | 97.22% | 98.30% |
| TREASURY BILL | 0.40% | 0.42% |
| TREASURY BILL | 0.40% | 0.42% |
| Only in LJAN | Only in LOCT |
|---|---|
| TREASURY BILL 0.40% | TREASURY BILL 0.43% |
| TREASURY BILL 0.40% | TREASURY BILL 0.43% |
| TREASURY BILL 0.40% | |
| TREASURY BILL 0.40% | |
| TREASURY BILL 0.40% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026.
Performance, window by window
| Window | Total return | Cash paid | Against the benchmark | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LJAN | LOCT | LJAN | LOCT | LJAN | LOCT | |
| 3 months | +1.3% | +1.0% | 1.2% | 1.3% | −1.0 pts | −1.2 pts |
| 6 months | +4.8% | +3.9% | 2.5% | 2.6% | −13.2 pts | −14.1 pts |
| 1 year | +5.1% | +5.4% | 4.9% | 5.2% | −11.4 pts | −11.2 pts |
| Since launch | +16.1% | +18.5% | 13.9% | 16.5% | −50.4 pts | −66.4 pts |
| LJAN Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - January Buffer with income on SPY, paying monthly | LOCT Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October Buffer with income on SPY, paying monthly | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Innovator | Innovator |
| Strategy | buffer with income | buffer with income |
| Benchmark | S&P 500 (SPY) | S&P 500 (SPY) |
| Pays | monthly | monthly |
| Payout rate, annualized | 4.8% | 5.2% |
| Expense ratio | 0.79% | 0.79% |
| Cash paid, 1 year | 4.9% | 5.2% |
| Price change, 1 year | +0.1% | +0.1% |
| Total return, 1 year | +5.1% | +5.4% |
| Benchmark return, 1 year | +16.6% | +16.6% |
| Ahead or behind | −11.4 pts | −11.2 pts |
| Return of capital, latest estimate | not published | not published |
| Age | 990 days | 1082 days |
| Net assets | $12m | $11m |
LJAN in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, LJAN paid 4.9% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 0.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +5.1%. S&P 500 (SPY) returned +16.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 11.4 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 4.8%, paid monthly.
LOCT in plain words
Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, LOCT paid 5.2% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 0.1%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +5.4%. S&P 500 (SPY) returned +16.6% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 11.2 pts. At its price on Sep 18, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 5.2%, paid monthly.
Questions people ask
- Which paid more, LJAN or LOCT?
- Over the year to Sep 18, 2026, LJAN paid 4.9% of its starting price in cash and LOCT paid 5.2%, so LOCT paid more. Cash paid is not the same as money made: the price change matters too.
- Which returned more once distributions are counted, LJAN or LOCT?
- With every distribution reinvested, LJAN returned +5.1% and LOCT returned +5.4% over the year to Sep 18, 2026, so LOCT returned more.
- Which is cheaper, LJAN or LOCT?
- LJAN charges 0.79% a year and LOCT charges 0.79%, so LJAN is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, LJAN against LOCT, data as of Sep 18, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/income/ljan-vs-loct Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.