PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BUFH vs. KLMN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BUFH vs. KLMN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH) and Invesco MSCI North America Climate ETF (KLMN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFH achieves a 2.45% return, which is significantly lower than KLMN's 10.80% return.


BUFH

1D
-0.05%
1M
0.75%
YTD
2.45%
6M
2.82%
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

KLMN

1D
-0.74%
1M
5.01%
YTD
10.80%
6M
10.80%
1Y
27.74%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUFH vs. KLMN - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BUFH and KLMN is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025

0.74

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

BUFH vs. KLMN — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFH

KLMN
KLMN Risk / Return Rank: 7070
Overall Rank
KLMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
KLMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 6969
Sortino Ratio Rank
KLMN Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
KLMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
KLMN Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BUFH vs. KLMN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH) and Invesco MSCI North America Climate ETF (KLMN). 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.


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

BUFH vs. KLMN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BUFHKLMNDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.28

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.91

0.99

+1.92

Drawdowns

BUFH vs. KLMN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFH drawdown since its inception was -1.53%, smaller than the maximum KLMN drawdown of -19.16%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFH and KLMN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFHKLMNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.53%

-19.16%

+17.63%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.96%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.05%

-0.74%

+0.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.18%

-2.54%

+2.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.97%

Volatility

BUFH vs. KLMN - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFHKLMNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.37%

12.22%

-9.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.37%

17.61%

-15.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.37%

17.61%

-15.24%

BUFH vs. KLMN - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFH has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than KLMN's 0.09% expense ratio.


Dividends

BUFH vs. KLMN - Dividend Comparison

BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders, while KLMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.28%.


Frequently Asked Questions


BUFH and KLMN have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

On fees, KLMN is cheaper at 0.09% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

KLMN is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.

KLMN has the higher dividend yield at 1.28%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.

BUFH is categorized as Defined Outcome, while KLMN is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BUFH and 0.09% for KLMN.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BUFH and KLMN

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