BUFG vs. LITL

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

BUFG (FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF) and LITL (Simplify Piper Sandler US Small-Cap PLUS Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFG is a Options Trading fund actively managed by FT Vest, while LITL is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Simplify. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BUFG returned 14.54% vs 31.53% for LITL. Their 0.71 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. BUFG charges 1.05%/yr vs 0.91%/yr for LITL.

Performance

BUFG vs. LITL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) and Simplify Piper Sandler US Small-Cap PLUS Income ETF (LITL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFG achieves a 7.09% return, which is significantly lower than LITL's 15.04% return.

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%

LITL

• 1D: 0.24%
• 1M: -2.40%
• 6M: 12.72%
• YTD: 15.04%
• 1Y: 31.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 28.40%

*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
LITL Simplify Piper Sandler US Small-Cap PLUS Income ETF	$92.88K	$67.65K	$57.85K

BUFG vs. LITL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BUFG FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF	7.09%	17.11%
LITL Simplify Piper Sandler US Small-Cap PLUS Income ETF	15.04%	18.93%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFG and LITL is 0.70, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 29, 2025	0.71

The correlation between BUFG and LITL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BUFG vs. LITL — 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

LITL

LITL Risk / Return Rank: 72
LITL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
LITL Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
LITL Omega Ratio Rank: 63
LITL Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
LITL Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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. LITL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) and Simplify Piper Sandler US Small-Cap PLUS Income ETF (LITL). 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	LITL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	1.57	+0.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.53	2.35	+0.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.27	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.36	3.05	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.00	9.55	+2.44

BUFG vs. LITL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFG Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the LITL Sharpe Ratio of 1.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFG and LITL, 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. LITL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFG drawdown since its inception was -17.62%, which is greater than LITL's maximum drawdown of -9.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFG and LITL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFG	LITL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.62%	-9.32%	-8.30%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.74%	-9.32%	+3.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.24%	-2.98%	+2.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.52%	-2.24%	-1.28%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.13%	2.98%	-1.85%

Volatility

BUFG vs. LITL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) is 1.93%, while Simplify Piper Sandler US Small-Cap PLUS Income ETF (LITL) has a volatility of 3.56%. This indicates that BUFG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LITL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFG	LITL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.93%	3.56%	-1.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.18%	12.19%	-6.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.75%	18.20%	-10.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.72%	18.33%	-6.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.72%	18.33%	-6.61%

BUFG vs. LITL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFG has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is higher than LITL's 0.91% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFG vs. LITL - Dividend Comparison

BUFG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while LITL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.67%.

Position	TTM	2025
BUFG FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%
LITL Simplify Piper Sandler US Small-Cap PLUS Income ETF	1.67%	0.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFG and LITL in my portfolio?

BUFG and LITL have a correlation of 0.70, 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 LITL?

LITL has higher volatility (3.56%) compared to BUFG (1.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFG dropped -17.62% vs LITL's -9.32%.

Which ETF is better, BUFG or LITL?

On 1-year performance, LITL leads with 31.53% vs 14.54% for BUFG. On fees, LITL is cheaper at 0.91% per year. On volatility, BUFG has been the lower-risk option at 1.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFG or LITL?

Over the 1-year period, LITL has performed better with a 31.53% return vs 14.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFG or LITL?

LITL is cheaper with a 0.91% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for BUFG.

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

LITL has the higher dividend yield at 1.67%, compared with 0.00% for BUFG.

What is the main difference between BUFG and LITL?

BUFG is categorized as Options Trading, while LITL is Small Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Simplify. Their fees differ too: 1.05% for BUFG and 0.91% for LITL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.57), 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.