BLCN vs. BUFH

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

BLCN (Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BLCN is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Siren NASDAQ Blockchain Economy Index, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. Over the past year, BLCN returned 18.72% vs 6.28% for BUFH. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BLCN charges 0.68%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.

Performance

BLCN vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN) and FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLCN achieves a 8.09% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.30% return.

BLCN

• 1D: 0.79%
• 1M: -1.57%
• YTD: 8.09%
• 6M: 5.66%
• 1Y: 18.72%
• 3Y*: 8.76%
• 5Y*: -10.30%
• 10Y*: —

BUFH

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.00%
• YTD: 2.30%
• 6M: 2.28%
• 1Y: 6.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BLCN vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BLCN Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF	8.09%	11.47%
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF	2.30%	3.81%

Correlation

The correlation between BLCN and BUFH is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2025	0.48

Return for Risk

BLCN vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank

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

BLCN

BLCN Risk / Return Rank: 17
BLCN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
BLCN Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
BLCN Omega Ratio Rank: 18
BLCN Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
BLCN Martin Ratio Rank: 15

BUFH

BUFH Risk / Return Rank: 91
BUFH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
BUFH Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
BUFH Omega Ratio Rank: 94
BUFH Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
BUFH Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

BLCN vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN) 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.

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.

	BLCN	BUFH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.51	2.66	-2.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.96	4.16	-3.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.59	-0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.64	4.11	-3.48
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.34	19.34	-18.00

BLCN vs. BUFH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLCN Sharpe Ratio is 0.51, which is lower than the BUFH Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLCN and BUFH, 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

BLCN vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLCN drawdown since its inception was -67.51%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLCN and BUFH.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLCN	BUFH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.51%	-1.53%	-65.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.53%	-1.53%	-28.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-45.26%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-67.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-47.54%	-0.26%	-47.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.40%	-0.18%	-30.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.00%	0.33%	+13.67%

Volatility

BLCN vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison

Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN) has a higher volatility of 12.33% compared to FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH) at 0.62%. This indicates that BLCN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BLCN	BUFH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.33%	0.62%	+11.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	27.23%	1.96%	+25.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.66%	2.37%	+34.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.22%	2.37%	+32.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	31.31%	2.37%	+28.94%

BLCN vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLCN has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

BLCN vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison

BLCN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.67%, while BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BLCN Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF	2.67%	3.01%	0.67%	0.54%	1.28%	0.56%	0.58%	1.45%	1.16%
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%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BLCN and BUFH in my portfolio?

BLCN and BUFH have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BLCN or BUFH?

BLCN has higher volatility (12.33%) compared to BUFH (0.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLCN dropped -67.51% vs BUFH's -1.53%.

Which ETF is better, BLCN or BUFH?

On 1-year performance, BLCN leads with 18.72% vs 6.28% for BUFH. On fees, BLCN is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, BUFH has been the lower-risk option at 0.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BLCN or BUFH?

Over the 1-year period, BLCN has performed better with a 18.72% return vs 6.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BLCN or BUFH?

BLCN is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BLCN or BUFH?

BLCN has the higher dividend yield at 2.67%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.

What is the main difference between BLCN and BUFH?

BLCN is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: SRN Advisors and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for BLCN and 0.95% for BUFH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.66 vs 0.51), 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.