BUFG vs. CBOX

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

BUFG (FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF) and CBOX (Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.08 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. BUFG charges 1.05%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for CBOX.

Performance

BUFG vs. CBOX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) and Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF (CBOX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

BUFG

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: 0.67%
• 6M: 6.16%
• YTD: 7.09%
• 1Y: 14.54%
• 3Y*: 12.50%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.46%

CBOX

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.37%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BUFG FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF	$913.54K	$974.97K	$1.14M
CBOX Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF	$7.89M	$8.89M	$7.14M

BUFG vs. CBOX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
BUFG FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF	4.45%
CBOX Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF	1.12%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFG and CBOX is 0.08, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2026	0.08

Return for Risk

BUFG vs. CBOX — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFG

BUFG Risk / Return Rank: 77
BUFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
BUFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BUFG Omega Ratio Rank: 79
BUFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
BUFG Martin Ratio Rank: 85

CBOX

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

BUFG vs. CBOX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) and Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF (CBOX). 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	CBOX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.53	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.00	—	—

Drawdowns

BUFG vs. CBOX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFG drawdown since its inception was -17.62%, which is greater than CBOX's maximum drawdown of -2.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFG and CBOX.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFG	CBOX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.62%	-2.90%	-14.72%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.74%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.24%	-2.30%	+2.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.52%	-1.47%	-2.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.13%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BUFG	CBOX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.93%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.18%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.75%	7.83%	-0.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.72%	7.83%	+3.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.72%	7.83%	+3.89%

BUFG vs. CBOX - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFG has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is higher than CBOX's 0.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFG vs. CBOX - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUFG nor CBOX has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFG and CBOX in my portfolio?

BUFG and CBOX have a correlation of 0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BUFG or CBOX?

On fees, CBOX is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFG or CBOX?

CBOX is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for BUFG.

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

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

What is the main difference between BUFG and CBOX?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 1.05% for BUFG and 0.14% for CBOX.