BUFG vs. GMAR

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR).

BUFG and GMAR are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BUFG is an actively managed fund by FT Vest. It was launched on Oct 26, 2021. GMAR is an actively managed fund by FT Vest. It was launched on Mar 16, 2023.

Performance

BUFG vs. GMAR - 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 Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BUFG vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BUFG FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF	-1.90%	12.33%	15.13%	15.28%
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March	2.32%	9.29%	12.14%	11.95%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFG achieves a -1.90% return, which is significantly lower than GMAR's 2.32% return.

BUFG

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: -2.64%
• YTD: -1.90%
• 6M: 0.02%
• 1Y: 13.15%
• 3Y*: 12.52%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GMAR

• 1D: 0.48%
• 1M: 1.40%
• YTD: 2.32%
• 6M: 4.36%
• 1Y: 12.40%
• 3Y*: 11.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFG vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFG has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is higher than GMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.

BUFG

FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF

GMAR

FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March

Return for Risk

BUFG vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFG

BUFG Risk / Return Rank: 61
BUFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
BUFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
BUFG Omega Ratio Rank: 64
BUFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
BUFG Martin Ratio Rank: 72

GMAR

GMAR Risk / Return Rank: 81
GMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
GMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
GMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 94
GMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
GMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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. GMAR - 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 Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). 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.

	BUFG	GMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.05	1.46	-0.41
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.62	2.14	-0.52
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.46	-0.21
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.59	1.84	-0.25
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.35	11.96	-3.61
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BUFG vs. GMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.05, which is comparable to the GMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFG and GMAR, 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

	BUFG	GMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.05	1.46	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.59	1.71	-1.12

Correlation

The correlation between BUFG and GMAR is 0.86, 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

BUFG vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUFG nor GMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

BUFG vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFG drawdown since its inception was -17.62%, which is greater than GMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFG and GMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFG	GMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.62%	-9.11%	-8.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.49%	-6.85%	-1.64%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.20%	0.00%	-3.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.74%	-0.57%	-3.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.62%	1.05%	+0.57%

Volatility

BUFG vs. GMAR - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) has a higher volatility of 3.89% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) at 2.22%. This indicates that BUFG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFG	GMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.89%	2.22%	+1.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.08%	2.87%	+3.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.54%	8.50%	+4.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.99%	6.96%	+5.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.99%	6.96%	+5.03%