BUFG vs. BUFQ

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

BUFG (FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF) and BUFQ (FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFG is a Options Trading fund actively managed by FT Vest, while BUFQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ 100 Index - USD. BUFG is actively managed, while BUFQ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BUFG returned 13.47%/yr vs 15.44%/yr for BUFQ. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BUFG charges 1.05%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for BUFQ.

Performance

BUFG vs. BUFQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFG achieves a 7.23% return, which is significantly lower than BUFQ's 8.57% return.

BUFG

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: 1.38%
• 6M: 6.15%
• YTD: 7.23%
• 1Y: 14.67%
• 3Y*: 13.47%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFQ

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: -0.08%
• 6M: 7.61%
• YTD: 8.57%
• 1Y: 16.81%
• 3Y*: 15.44%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFG vs. BUFQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BUFG FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF	7.23%	12.33%	15.13%	18.49%	1.87%
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF	8.57%	14.03%	16.41%	35.51%	0.73%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFG and BUFQ is 0.87, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 16, 2022	0.87

The correlation between BUFG and BUFQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BUFG vs. BUFQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFG

BUFG Risk / Return Rank: 75
BUFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
BUFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BUFG Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BUFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
BUFG Martin Ratio Rank: 83

BUFQ

BUFQ Risk / Return Rank: 81
BUFQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
BUFQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
BUFQ Omega Ratio Rank: 81
BUFQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
BUFQ Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

BUFG vs. BUFQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). 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.

	BUFG	BUFQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	1.95	-0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.75	2.88	-0.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.38	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.52	3.13	-0.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.97	15.25	-2.27

BUFG vs. BUFQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the BUFQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFG and BUFQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BUFG vs. BUFQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFG drawdown since its inception was -17.62%, which is greater than BUFQ's maximum drawdown of -15.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFG and BUFQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFG	BUFQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.62%	-15.74%	-1.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.74%	-5.39%	-0.35%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.20%	-15.74%	+2.54%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.97%	+0.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.55%	-2.27%	-1.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.11%	1.11%	0.00%

Volatility

BUFG vs. BUFQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) is 2.16%, while FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) has a volatility of 3.19%. This indicates that BUFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFG	BUFQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.16%	3.19%	-1.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.16%	6.98%	-0.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.61%	8.67%	-1.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.77%	13.28%	-1.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.77%	13.28%	-1.51%

BUFG vs. BUFQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFG has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFQ's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFG vs. BUFQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUFG nor BUFQ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFG and BUFQ in my portfolio?

BUFG and BUFQ have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUFG or BUFQ?

BUFQ has higher volatility (3.19%) compared to BUFG (2.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFG dropped -17.62% vs BUFQ's -15.74%.

Which ETF is better, BUFG or BUFQ?

On 3-year performance, BUFQ leads with 15.44% vs 13.47% for BUFG. On fees, BUFG is cheaper at 1.05% per year. On volatility, BUFG has been the lower-risk option at 2.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFG or BUFQ?

Over the 3-year period, BUFQ has performed better with a 15.44% return vs 13.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFG or BUFQ?

BUFG is cheaper with a 1.05% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFG or BUFQ?

BUFG and BUFQ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BUFG and BUFQ?

BUFG is categorized as Options Trading, while BUFQ is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 1.05% for BUFG and 1.10% for BUFQ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.95 vs 1.90), 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.