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

Performance

BUFC vs. TAFM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF (TAFM). 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 higher than TAFM's 0.84% return.


BUFC

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

TAFM

1D
-0.04%
1M
-1.60%
6M
0.02%
YTD
0.84%
1Y
5.14%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
3.47%
*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
$4.72M$4.38M$5.17M

BUFC vs. TAFM - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BUFC
AB Conservative Buffer ETF
3.40%5.50%10.81%0.65%
TAFM
AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF
0.84%4.21%2.54%1.51%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFC and TAFM is 0.17, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


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

0.17

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

0.13

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. TAFM — 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

TAFM
TAFM Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
TAFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TAFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
TAFM Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
TAFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 5959
Calmar Ratio Rank
TAFM Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
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. TAFM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) and AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF (TAFM). 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.


BUFCTAFMDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.36

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.00

2.11

-0.11

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.37

7.17

+1.20

BUFC vs. TAFM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFC Sharpe Ratio is 1.63, which is comparable to the TAFM Sharpe Ratio of 1.84. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFC and TAFM, 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. TAFM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFC drawdown since its inception was -8.29%, which is greater than TAFM's maximum drawdown of -4.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFC and TAFM.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFCTAFMDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.29%

-4.74%

-3.55%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.62%

-2.69%

-0.93%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.13%

-1.70%

+1.57%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.73%

-0.92%

+0.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.86%

0.79%

+0.07%

Volatility

BUFC vs. TAFM - Volatility Comparison

AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) has a higher volatility of 1.15% compared to AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF (TAFM) at 0.86%. This indicates that BUFC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TAFM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFCTAFMDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.15%

0.86%

+0.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.56%

2.20%

+1.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.45%

3.09%

+1.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

5.58%

4.84%

+0.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

5.58%

4.84%

+0.74%

BUFC vs. TAFM - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFC has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than TAFM's 0.28% expense ratio.


Dividends

BUFC vs. TAFM - Dividend Comparison

BUFC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while TAFM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.68%.


PositionTTM202520242023
BUFC
AB Conservative Buffer ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
TAFM
AB Tax-Aware Intermediate Municipal ETF
3.37%3.51%3.35%0.18%

Frequently Asked Questions


BUFC and TAFM have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BUFC has higher volatility (1.15%) compared to TAFM (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFC dropped -8.29% vs TAFM's -4.74%.

On 1-year performance, BUFC leads with 7.71% vs 5.14% for TAFM. On fees, TAFM is cheaper at 0.28% per year. On volatility, TAFM has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BUFC has performed better with a 7.71% return vs 5.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

TAFM is cheaper with a 0.28% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for BUFC.

TAFM has the higher dividend yield at 3.37%, compared with 0.00% for BUFC.

BUFC is categorized as Options Trading, while TAFM is Municipal Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for BUFC and 0.28% for TAFM.

TAFM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.63), 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 TAFM

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