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

Performance

BUFC vs. BUFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and FT Vest Laddered Buffer ETF (BUFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

BUFC vs. BUFR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BUFC
AB Conservative Buffer ETF
-1.68%5.50%10.81%0.47%
BUFR
FT Vest Laddered Buffer ETF
-1.43%12.44%14.68%0.91%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFC achieves a -1.68% return, which is significantly lower than BUFR's -1.43% return.


BUFC

1D
1.03%
1M
-1.19%
YTD
-1.68%
6M
0.01%
1Y
5.07%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BUFR

1D
1.90%
1M
-2.26%
YTD
-1.43%
6M
1.05%
1Y
13.74%
3Y*
12.89%
5Y*
8.75%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


BUFC vs. BUFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFC has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFR's 0.95% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

BUFC vs. BUFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFC
BUFC Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
BUFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFC Omega Ratio Rank: 4545
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 3838
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFC Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank

BUFR
BUFR Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
BUFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7373
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFR Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFR Martin Ratio Rank: 8484
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. BUFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and FT Vest Laddered Buffer ETF (BUFR). 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.


BUFCBUFRDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.70

1.24

-0.55

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.11

1.81

-0.70

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.30

-0.12

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

0.99

1.63

-0.65

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

5.24

9.18

-3.94

BUFC vs. BUFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFC Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is lower than the BUFR Sharpe Ratio of 1.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFC and BUFR, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BUFCBUFRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.70

1.24

-0.55

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.13

0.95

+0.18

Correlation

The correlation between BUFC and BUFR is 0.83, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

BUFC vs. BUFR - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUFC nor BUFR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

BUFC vs. BUFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFC drawdown since its inception was -8.29%, smaller than the maximum BUFR drawdown of -13.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFC and BUFR.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFCBUFRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.29%

-13.73%

+5.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.29%

-8.76%

+3.47%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.73%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.63%

-2.79%

+0.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.78%

-2.15%

+1.37%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.99%

1.56%

-0.57%

Volatility

BUFC vs. BUFR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) is 1.87%, while FT Vest Laddered Buffer ETF (BUFR) has a volatility of 3.44%. This indicates that BUFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


BUFCBUFRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.87%

3.44%

-1.57%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.56%

5.22%

-1.66%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.30%

11.11%

-3.81%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.77%

10.46%

-4.69%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.77%

10.34%

-4.57%