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

Performance

BUFP vs. FBUF - 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 Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). 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 6.23% return, which is significantly higher than FBUF's 5.32% return.


BUFP

1D
-0.22%
1M
2.04%
YTD
6.23%
6M
7.00%
1Y
17.24%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FBUF

1D
-0.12%
1M
2.85%
YTD
5.32%
6M
6.28%
1Y
19.61%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUFP vs. FBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
BUFP
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF
6.23%12.92%6.36%
FBUF
Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF
5.32%14.01%7.85%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFP and FBUF is 0.88, 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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024

0.87

The correlation between BUFP and FBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.88 - 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

BUFP vs. FBUF — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFP
BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

FBUF
FBUF Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
FBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
FBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
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. FBUF - 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 Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). 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.


BUFPFBUFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.13

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.57

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.53

+0.05

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.93

3.51

+0.42

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.96

15.68

+6.29

BUFP vs. FBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFP Sharpe Ratio is 2.77, which is comparable to the FBUF Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFP and FBUF, 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


BUFPFBUFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.77

2.63

+0.13

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.40

1.47

-0.07

Drawdowns

BUFP vs. FBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFP drawdown since its inception was -11.98%, which is greater than FBUF's maximum drawdown of -11.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFP and FBUF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFPFBUFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.98%

-11.09%

-0.89%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.41%

-5.61%

+1.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.22%

-0.22%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.00%

-1.38%

+0.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.79%

1.25%

-0.46%

Volatility

BUFP vs. FBUF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) is 0.95%, while Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) has a volatility of 1.11%. This indicates that BUFP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFPFBUFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.95%

1.11%

-0.16%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.82%

5.37%

-0.55%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.27%

7.49%

-1.22%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.49%

9.55%

-0.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.49%

9.55%

-0.06%

BUFP vs. FBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBUF's 0.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

BUFP vs. FBUF - Dividend Comparison

BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than FBUF's 0.63% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
BUFP
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF
0.01%0.01%0.02%
FBUF
Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF
0.63%0.64%0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions


BUFP and FBUF have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FBUF has higher volatility (1.11%) compared to BUFP (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFP dropped -11.98% vs FBUF's -11.09%.

On 1-year performance, FBUF leads with 19.61% vs 17.24% for BUFP. On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, BUFP has been the lower-risk option at 0.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FBUF has performed better with a 19.61% return vs 17.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BUFP.

FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.01% for BUFP.

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BUFP and 0.48% for FBUF.

BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 vs 2.63), 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 FBUF

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