BUFC vs. LRGC

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC).

BUFC and LRGC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BUFC is an actively managed fund by AllianceBernstein. It was launched on Dec 12, 2023. LRGC is an actively managed fund by AllianceBernstein. It was launched on Sep 19, 2023.

Performance

BUFC vs. LRGC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BUFC vs. LRGC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	-1.68%	5.50%	10.81%	0.47%
LRGC AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF	-5.45%	16.23%	24.92%	1.24%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFC achieves a -1.68% return, which is significantly higher than LRGC's -5.45% return.

BUFC

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

LRGC

• 1D: 2.88%
• 1M: -4.95%
• YTD: -5.45%
• 6M: -3.88%
• 1Y: 15.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFC vs. LRGC - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

BUFC

AB Conservative Buffer ETF

LRGC

AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF

Return for Risk

BUFC vs. LRGC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFC

BUFC Risk / Return Rank: 42
BUFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
BUFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
BUFC Omega Ratio Rank: 45
BUFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
BUFC Martin Ratio Rank: 53

LRGC

LRGC Risk / Return Rank: 51
LRGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
LRGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
LRGC Omega Ratio Rank: 51
LRGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
LRGC Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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. LRGC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC). 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	LRGC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.70	0.85	-0.15
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.11	1.34	-0.23
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.20	-0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.99	1.36	-0.37
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.24	5.56	-0.32
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. LRGC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFC Sharpe Ratio is 0.70, which is comparable to the LRGC Sharpe Ratio of 0.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFC and LRGC, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BUFC	LRGC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70	0.85	-0.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.13	1.14	-0.01

Correlation

The correlation between BUFC and LRGC is 0.80, 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. LRGC - Dividend Comparison

BUFC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LRGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LRGC AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF	0.61%	0.58%	0.46%	0.17%

Drawdowns

BUFC vs. LRGC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFC drawdown since its inception was -8.29%, smaller than the maximum LRGC drawdown of -19.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFC and LRGC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFC	LRGC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.29%	-19.38%	+11.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.29%	-11.76%	+6.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.63%	-7.41%	+4.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.78%	-2.22%	+1.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.99%	2.88%	-1.89%

Volatility

BUFC vs. LRGC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) is 1.87%, while AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) has a volatility of 5.35%. This indicates that BUFC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LRGC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFC	LRGC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.87%	5.35%	-3.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.56%	9.35%	-5.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.30%	18.06%	-10.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.77%	15.42%	-9.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.77%	15.42%	-9.65%