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

Performance

BUFC vs. LOWV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF (LOWV). 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 3.40% return, which is significantly lower than LOWV's 5.85% return.


BUFC

1D
0.26%
1M
0.47%
6M
2.74%
YTD
3.40%
1Y
7.71%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
7.74%

LOWV

1D
0.93%
1M
2.67%
6M
5.32%
YTD
5.85%
1Y
11.55%
3Y*
14.74%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
17.14%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$1.47M$1.25M$1.78M
$248.27K$453.80K$603.81K

BUFC vs. LOWV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BUFC
AB Conservative Buffer ETF
3.40%5.50%10.81%0.65%
LOWV
AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF
5.85%12.26%20.43%1.00%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFC and LOWV is 0.75, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.75

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 13, 2023

0.76

The correlation between BUFC and LOWV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.76 - 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. LOWV — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BUFC
BUFC Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
BUFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 7070
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFC Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFC Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank

LOWV
LOWV Risk / Return Rank: 3737
Overall Rank
LOWV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LOWV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
LOWV Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
LOWV Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
LOWV Martin Ratio Rank: 4040
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BUFC vs. LOWV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF (LOWV). 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.


BUFCLOWVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.66

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.90

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.17

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.00

1.07

+0.93

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.37

4.25

+4.12

BUFC vs. LOWV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFC Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is higher than the LOWV Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFC and LOWV, 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. LOWV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFC drawdown since its inception was -8.29%, smaller than the maximum LOWV drawdown of -13.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFC and LOWV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFCLOWVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.29%

-13.87%

+5.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.62%

-9.59%

+5.97%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.87%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.13%

0.00%

-0.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.73%

-1.49%

+0.76%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.86%

2.41%

-1.55%

Volatility

BUFC vs. LOWV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) is 1.15%, while AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF (LOWV) has a volatility of 2.56%. This indicates that BUFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LOWV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFCLOWVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.15%

2.56%

-1.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.56%

7.89%

-4.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.45%

10.58%

-6.13%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.58%

11.87%

-6.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.58%

11.87%

-6.29%

BUFC vs. LOWV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFC has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than LOWV's 0.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

BUFC vs. LOWV - Dividend Comparison

BUFC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LOWV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.86%.


PositionTTM202520242023
BUFC
AB Conservative Buffer ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
LOWV
AB US Low Volatility Equity ETF
0.86%0.85%0.92%0.77%

Frequently Asked Questions


BUFC and LOWV have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

LOWV has higher volatility (2.56%) compared to BUFC (1.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFC dropped -8.29% vs LOWV's -13.87%.

On 1-year performance, LOWV leads with 11.55% vs 7.71% for BUFC. On fees, LOWV is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, BUFC has been the lower-risk option at 1.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, LOWV has performed better with a 11.55% return vs 7.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LOWV is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for BUFC.

LOWV has the higher dividend yield at 0.86%, compared with 0.00% for BUFC.

BUFC is categorized as Options Trading, while LOWV is Low Volatility. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for BUFC and 0.48% for LOWV.

BUFC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.63 vs 0.97), 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 LOWV

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