BUFH vs. PMAP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) and PMAP (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BUFH charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMAP.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFH achieves a 2.30% return, which is significantly lower than PMAP's 3.18% return.

BUFH

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 0.02%
• YTD: 2.30%
• 6M: 2.33%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PMAP

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 0.04%
• YTD: 3.18%
• 6M: 3.26%
• 1Y: 6.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFH vs. PMAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF	2.30%	3.81%
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April	3.18%	3.33%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFH and PMAP is 0.71, 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 25, 2025	0.71

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

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

PMAP

PMAP Risk / Return Rank: 99
PMAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

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.

	BUFH	PMAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	5.86	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	11.65	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	2.66	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	19.59	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	103.79	—

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFH	PMAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.53%	-1.75%	+0.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.35%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.26%	-0.20%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.18%	-0.08%	-0.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.07%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BUFH	PMAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.42%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	0.89%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.38%	1.18%	+1.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.38%	2.31%	+0.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.38%	2.31%	+0.07%

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

Can I hold both BUFH and PMAP in my portfolio?

BUFH and PMAP have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BUFH or PMAP?

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.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFH or PMAP?

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

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFH or PMAP?

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

What is the main difference between BUFH and PMAP?

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