PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BUFM vs. FWD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BUFM vs. FWD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFM) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFM achieves a 3.71% return, which is significantly lower than FWD's 40.11% return.


BUFM

1D
-0.13%
1M
2.19%
YTD
3.71%
6M
4.16%
1Y
12.60%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FWD

1D
-0.27%
1M
14.15%
YTD
40.11%
6M
39.78%
1Y
75.95%
3Y*
39.48%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUFM vs. FWD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
BUFM
AB Moderate Buffer ETF
3.71%12.94%-1.10%
FWD
AB Disruptors ETF
40.11%32.00%-3.26%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFM and FWD 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2024

0.76

The correlation between BUFM and FWD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.76 - 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

BUFM vs. FWD — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFM
BUFM Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
BUFM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFM Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFM Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFM Calmar Ratio Rank: 6363
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFM Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

FWD
FWD Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
FWD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FWD Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
FWD Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
FWD Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
FWD Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

BUFM vs. FWD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFM) and AB Disruptors ETF (FWD). 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.


BUFMFWDDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.97

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.73

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.50

-0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.11

5.86

-2.75

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.49

20.83

-9.34

BUFM vs. FWD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFM Sharpe Ratio is 2.19, which is lower than the FWD Sharpe Ratio of 3.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFM and FWD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BUFMFWDDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.19

3.16

-0.97

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.12

1.67

-0.55

Drawdowns

BUFM vs. FWD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFM drawdown since its inception was -9.43%, smaller than the maximum FWD drawdown of -29.02%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFM and FWD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFMFWDDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.43%

-29.02%

+19.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.07%

-13.03%

+8.96%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.02%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.13%

-0.27%

+0.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.99%

-4.06%

+3.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.10%

3.66%

-2.56%

Volatility

BUFM vs. FWD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AB Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFM) is 1.05%, while AB Disruptors ETF (FWD) has a volatility of 7.77%. This indicates that BUFM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FWD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFMFWDDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.05%

7.77%

-6.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.37%

18.96%

-14.59%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.77%

24.15%

-18.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.43%

24.72%

-15.29%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.43%

24.72%

-15.29%

BUFM vs. FWD - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFM has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than FWD's 0.65% expense ratio.


Dividends

BUFM vs. FWD - Dividend Comparison

BUFM has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FWD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%.


PositionTTM20252024
BUFM
AB Moderate Buffer ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%
FWD
AB Disruptors ETF
0.08%0.11%1.89%

Frequently Asked Questions


BUFM and FWD 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.

FWD has higher volatility (7.77%) compared to BUFM (1.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFM dropped -9.43% vs FWD's -29.02%.

On 1-year performance, FWD leads with 75.95% vs 12.60% for BUFM. On fees, FWD is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, BUFM has been the lower-risk option at 1.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FWD has performed better with a 75.95% return vs 12.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FWD is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for BUFM.

FWD has the higher dividend yield at 0.08%, compared with 0.00% for BUFM.

BUFM is categorized as Defined Outcome, while FWD is Global Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for BUFM and 0.65% for FWD.

FWD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.16 vs 2.19), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BUFM and FWD

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