PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BUFC vs. AAPR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BUFC vs. AAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr To April 2026 (AAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFC achieves a 2.87% return, which is significantly lower than AAPR's 3.40% return.


BUFC

1D
-0.07%
1M
-0.00%
YTD
2.87%
6M
2.86%
1Y
8.44%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

AAPR

1D
-0.14%
1M
-0.25%
YTD
3.40%
6M
3.56%
1Y
9.11%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUFC vs. AAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BUFC and AAPR is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.63

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2024

0.71

The correlation between BUFC and AAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

BUFC vs. AAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFC
BUFC Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
BUFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFC Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFC Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

AAPR
AAPR Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
AAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
AAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
AAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
AAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BUFC vs. AAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr To April 2026 (AAPR). 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.


BUFCAAPRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.30

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.86

-0.48

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.34

9.48

-7.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.91

47.98

-38.07

BUFC vs. AAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFC Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is lower than the AAPR Sharpe Ratio of 3.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFC and AAPR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

BUFC vs. AAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFC drawdown since its inception was -8.29%, which is greater than AAPR's maximum drawdown of -5.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFC and AAPR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFCAAPRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.29%

-5.99%

-2.30%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.62%

-0.96%

-2.66%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.19%

-0.56%

+0.37%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.75%

-0.45%

-0.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.85%

0.19%

+0.66%

Volatility

BUFC vs. AAPR - Volatility Comparison

AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) has a higher volatility of 1.60% compared to Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 2 Yr To April 2026 (AAPR) at 1.06%. This indicates that BUFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFCAAPRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.60%

1.06%

+0.54%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.53%

1.85%

+1.68%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.35%

2.48%

+1.87%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.64%

4.80%

+0.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.64%

4.80%

+0.84%

BUFC vs. AAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFC has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than AAPR's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

BUFC vs. AAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUFC nor AAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


BUFC and AAPR have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BUFC has higher volatility (1.60%) compared to AAPR (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFC dropped -8.29% vs AAPR's -5.99%.

On 1-year performance, AAPR leads with 9.11% vs 8.44% for BUFC. On fees, BUFC is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, AAPR has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AAPR has performed better with a 9.11% return vs 8.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BUFC is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for AAPR.

BUFC and AAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: AllianceBernstein and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for BUFC and 0.79% for AAPR.

AAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.69 vs 1.95), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BUFC and AAPR

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