PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BUFP vs. BKLC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BUFP vs. BKLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) and BNY Mellon US Large Cap Core Equity ETF (BKLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFP achieves a 6.33% return, which is significantly lower than BKLC's 9.77% return.


BUFP

1D
0.28%
1M
0.57%
YTD
6.33%
6M
6.42%
1Y
17.31%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BKLC

1D
-0.36%
1M
0.24%
YTD
9.77%
6M
9.28%
1Y
26.77%
3Y*
22.14%
5Y*
13.82%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUFP vs. BKLC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
BUFP
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF
6.33%12.92%6.30%
BKLC
BNY Mellon US Large Cap Core Equity ETF
9.77%18.06%9.95%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFP and BKLC is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.92

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2024

0.92

The correlation between BUFP and BKLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

BUFP vs. BKLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BUFP
BKLC

Technology

38.4%
38.8%

Financial Services

11.0%
10.7%

Communication Services

10.8%
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
10.1%

Healthcare

8.4%
8.4%

Industrials

7.9%
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

4.6%
4.4%

Energy

3.2%
3.2%

Utilities

2.1%
2.0%

Real Estate

1.8%
1.7%

Basic Materials

1.7%
1.8%

Technology

BUFP
38.4%
BKLC
38.8%

Financial Services

BUFP
11.0%
BKLC
10.7%

Communication Services

BUFP
10.8%
BKLC
10.9%

Consumer Cyclical

BUFP
10.0%
BKLC
10.1%

Healthcare

BUFP
8.4%
BKLC
8.4%

Industrials

BUFP
7.9%
BKLC
8.1%

Consumer Defensive

BUFP
4.6%
BKLC
4.4%

Energy

BUFP
3.2%
BKLC
3.2%

Utilities

BUFP
2.1%
BKLC
2.0%

Real Estate

BUFP
1.8%
BKLC
1.7%

Basic Materials

BUFP
1.7%
BKLC
1.8%

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

BUFP vs. BKLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFP
BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

BKLC
BKLC Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
BKLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BKLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
BKLC Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
BKLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 6161
Calmar Ratio Rank
BKLC Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

BUFP vs. BKLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) and BNY Mellon US Large Cap Core Equity ETF (BKLC). 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.


BUFPBKLCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.61

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

1.38

+0.18

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.94

2.95

+0.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.61

13.05

+8.56

BUFP vs. BKLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFP Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is comparable to the BKLC Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFP and BKLC, 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...

Drawdowns

BUFP vs. BKLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFP drawdown since its inception was -11.98%, smaller than the maximum BKLC drawdown of -26.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFP and BKLC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFPBKLCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.98%

-26.14%

+14.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.41%

-9.10%

+4.69%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.05%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-26.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.19%

-1.78%

+1.59%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.99%

-5.24%

+4.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.80%

2.06%

-1.26%

Volatility

BUFP vs. BKLC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) is 1.99%, while BNY Mellon US Large Cap Core Equity ETF (BKLC) has a volatility of 4.83%. This indicates that BUFP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BKLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFPBKLCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.99%

4.83%

-2.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.11%

10.00%

-4.89%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.40%

12.77%

-6.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.46%

17.27%

-7.81%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.46%

17.47%

-8.01%

BUFP vs. BKLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BKLC's 0.00% expense ratio.


Dividends

BUFP vs. BKLC - Dividend Comparison

BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than BKLC's 1.02% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
BKLC
BNY Mellon US Large Cap Core Equity ETF
1.02%1.05%1.22%1.35%1.64%1.10%0.84%
BUFP
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF
0.01%0.01%0.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, BUFP and BKLC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

BKLC has higher volatility (4.83%) compared to BUFP (1.99%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFP dropped -11.98% vs BKLC's -26.14%.

On 1-year performance, BKLC leads with 26.77% vs 17.31% for BUFP. On fees, BKLC is cheaper at 0.00% per year. On volatility, BUFP has been the lower-risk option at 1.99%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BKLC has performed better with a 26.77% return vs 17.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BKLC is cheaper with a 0.00% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BUFP.

BKLC has the higher dividend yield at 1.02%, compared with 0.01% for BUFP.

BUFP is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BKLC is Large Cap Blend Equities. BUFP tracks S&P 500, while BKLC tracks Morningstar US Large Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and BNY Mellon. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BUFP and 0.00% for BKLC.

BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.72 vs 2.11), 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 BUFP and BKLC

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