PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ABFL vs. BUFH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ABFL vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ABFL achieves a 17.63% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.45% return.


ABFL

1D
0.02%
1M
6.04%
YTD
17.63%
6M
17.18%
1Y
20.72%
3Y*
19.01%
5Y*
12.77%
10Y*

BUFH

1D
-0.05%
1M
0.75%
YTD
2.45%
6M
2.82%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ABFL vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
ABFL
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF
17.63%3.08%
BUFH
FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF
2.45%3.89%

Correlation

The correlation between ABFL and BUFH is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025

0.64

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

ABFL vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank

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

ABFL
ABFL Risk / Return Rank: 4545
Overall Rank
ABFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ABFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
ABFL Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
ABFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
ABFL Martin Ratio Rank: 5555
Martin Ratio Rank

BUFH
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.

ABFL vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) and FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH). 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.


ABFLBUFHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.90

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.41

ABFL vs. BUFH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


ABFLBUFHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.36

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

2.91

-2.12

Drawdowns

ABFL vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABFL drawdown since its inception was -34.95%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABFL and BUFH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ABFLBUFHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-34.95%

-1.53%

-33.42%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.17%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.92%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.05%

+0.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.99%

-0.18%

-4.81%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.21%

Volatility

ABFL vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ABFLBUFHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.31%

2.37%

+12.94%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.09%

2.37%

+14.72%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.71%

2.37%

+16.34%

ABFL vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison

ABFL has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

ABFL vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison

ABFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.53%, while BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
ABFL
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF
0.53%0.62%0.70%0.94%1.36%9.63%0.41%0.72%0.62%0.40%
BUFH
FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


ABFL and BUFH have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, ABFL is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

ABFL is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.

ABFL has the higher dividend yield at 0.53%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.

ABFL is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Abacus and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ABFL and 0.95% for BUFH.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ABFL and BUFH

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