BUFC vs. LOCT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BUFC (AB Conservative Buffer ETF) and LOCT (Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BUFC returned 8.86% vs 5.75% for LOCT. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BUFC charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for LOCT.

Performance

BUFC vs. LOCT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFC achieves a 2.84% return, which is significantly higher than LOCT's 2.29% return.

BUFC

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 1.58%
• YTD: 2.84%
• 6M: 3.28%
• 1Y: 8.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

LOCT

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.54%
• YTD: 2.29%
• 6M: 2.92%
• 1Y: 5.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFC vs. LOCT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	2.84%	5.50%	10.81%	0.47%
LOCT Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October	2.29%	5.56%	5.21%	0.28%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFC and LOCT 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 Dec 14, 2023	0.60

The correlation between BUFC and LOCT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BUFC vs. LOCT — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFC

BUFC Risk / Return Rank: 61
BUFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
BUFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
BUFC Omega Ratio Rank: 68
BUFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
BUFC Martin Ratio Rank: 60

LOCT

LOCT Risk / Return Rank: 89
LOCT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
LOCT Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
LOCT Omega Ratio Rank: 93
LOCT Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
LOCT Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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. LOCT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT). 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.

	BUFC	LOCT	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.09	2.67	-0.58
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.97	4.10	-1.13
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.40	1.66	-0.25
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.46	4.71	-2.25
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	10.49	25.14	-14.65
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BUFC vs. LOCT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFC Sharpe Ratio is 2.09, which is comparable to the LOCT Sharpe Ratio of 2.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFC and LOCT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BUFC	LOCT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.09	2.67	-0.58
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.42	1.69	-0.27

Drawdowns

BUFC vs. LOCT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFC drawdown since its inception was -8.29%, which is greater than LOCT's maximum drawdown of -4.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFC and LOCT.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFC	LOCT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.29%	-4.69%	-3.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.62%	-1.23%	-2.39%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.12%	-0.06%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.76%	-0.14%	-0.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.85%	0.23%	+0.62%

Volatility

BUFC vs. LOCT - Volatility Comparison

AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) has a higher volatility of 0.98% compared to Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October (LOCT) at 0.22%. This indicates that BUFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LOCT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFC	LOCT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.98%	0.22%	+0.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.36%	1.67%	+1.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.25%	2.16%	+2.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.64%	3.60%	+2.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.64%	3.60%	+2.04%

BUFC vs. LOCT - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

BUFC vs. LOCT - Dividend Comparison

BUFC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LOCT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.14%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LOCT Innovator Premium Income 15 Buffer ETF - October	5.14%	5.12%	6.27%	1.64%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFC and LOCT in my portfolio?

BUFC and LOCT 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.

Which is riskier, BUFC or LOCT?

BUFC has higher volatility (0.98%) compared to LOCT (0.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFC dropped -8.29% vs LOCT's -4.69%.

Which ETF is better, BUFC or LOCT?

On 1-year performance, BUFC leads with 8.86% vs 5.75% for LOCT. On fees, BUFC is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, LOCT has been the lower-risk option at 0.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFC or LOCT?

Over the 1-year period, BUFC has performed better with a 8.86% return vs 5.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFC or LOCT?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFC or LOCT?

LOCT has the higher dividend yield at 5.14%, compared with 0.00% for BUFC.

What is the main difference between BUFC and LOCT?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LOCT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.67 vs 2.09), 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.