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

Performance

BUFH vs. PMAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). 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 PMAP's 3.28% return.


BUFH

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

PMAP

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.59%
YTD
3.28%
6M
3.83%
1Y
7.34%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUFH vs. PMAP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BUFH and PMAP is 0.70, 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

0.70

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. PMAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFH

PMAP
PMAP Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
PMAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
PMAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
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. PMAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). 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. PMAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BUFHPMAPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.43

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.91

3.23

-0.32

Drawdowns

BUFH vs. PMAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFH drawdown since its inception was -1.53%, smaller than the maximum PMAP drawdown of -1.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFH and PMAP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFHPMAPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.53%

-1.75%

+0.22%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.34%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.05%

-0.06%

+0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.18%

-0.08%

-0.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.05%

Volatility

BUFH vs. PMAP - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFHPMAPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.37%

1.15%

+1.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.37%

2.33%

+0.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.37%

2.33%

+0.04%

BUFH vs. PMAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFH has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAP's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

BUFH vs. PMAP - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUFH nor PMAP has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


BUFH and PMAP 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.

On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

PMAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.

BUFH and PMAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BUFH and 0.50% for PMAP.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BUFH and PMAP

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