BUFG vs. SAUG
BUFG (FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF) and SAUG (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - August) are both Options Trading funds from FT Vest. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BUFG returned 17.53% vs 19.51% for SAUG. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BUFG charges 1.05%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for SAUG.
Performance
BUFG vs. SAUG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BUFG achieves a 6.40% return, which is significantly lower than SAUG's 7.65% return.
BUFG
- 1D
- -0.30%
- 1M
- 2.34%
- YTD
- 6.40%
- 6M
- 6.86%
- 1Y
- 17.53%
- 3Y*
- 14.30%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SAUG
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 1.58%
- YTD
- 7.65%
- 6M
- 7.95%
- 1Y
- 19.51%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFG vs. SAUG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BUFG FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF | 6.40% | 12.33% | 15.13% | 6.27% |
SAUG FT Cboe Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - August | 7.65% | 8.23% | 11.08% | 6.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between BUFG and SAUG is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.75 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 22, 2023 | 0.73 |
The correlation between BUFG and SAUG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
BUFG vs. SAUG — Risk / Return Rank
BUFG
SAUG
BUFG vs. SAUG - 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. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - August (SAUG). 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 | SAUG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 1.39 | +0.06 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.07 | 4.78 | -1.71 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.15 | 15.56 | +0.59 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BUFG | SAUG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.31 | 2.05 | +0.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.74 | 1.03 | -0.29 |
Drawdowns
BUFG vs. SAUG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BUFG drawdown since its inception was -17.62%, which is greater than SAUG's maximum drawdown of -14.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFG and SAUG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BUFG | SAUG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.62% | -14.62% | -3.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.74% | -4.10% | -1.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.20% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.30% | -0.19% | -0.11% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.62% | -2.24% | -1.38% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.09% | 1.26% | -0.17% |
Volatility
BUFG vs. SAUG - Volatility Comparison
FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - August (SAUG) have volatilities of 1.20% and 1.22%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BUFG | SAUG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.20% | 1.22% | -0.02% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.82% | 5.41% | +0.41% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.64% | 9.59% | -1.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.84% | 11.81% | +0.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.84% | 11.81% | +0.03% |
BUFG vs. SAUG - Expense Ratio Comparison
BUFG has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is higher than SAUG's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
BUFG vs. SAUG - Dividend Comparison
Neither BUFG nor SAUG has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
BUFG and SAUG have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SAUG has higher volatility (1.22%) compared to BUFG (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFG dropped -17.62% vs SAUG's -14.62%.
On 1-year performance, SAUG leads with 19.51% vs 17.53% for BUFG. On fees, SAUG is cheaper at 0.90% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, SAUG has performed better with a 19.51% return vs 17.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SAUG is cheaper with a 0.90% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for BUFG.
BUFG and SAUG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
Their fees differ too: 1.05% for BUFG and 0.90% for SAUG.
BUFG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 vs 2.05), 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.
Find the right allocation for BUFG and SAUG
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