BUFP vs. FJUL

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) and FJUL (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFP is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500, while FJUL is a Options Trading fund tracking the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index July. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BUFP returned 17.31% vs 18.77% for FJUL. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BUFP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for FJUL.

Performance

BUFP vs. FJUL - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (FJUL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with BUFP having a 6.33% return and FJUL slightly lower at 6.19%.

BUFP

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

FJUL

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 0.82%
• YTD: 6.19%
• 6M: 6.08%
• 1Y: 18.77%
• 3Y*: 15.89%
• 5Y*: 11.44%
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFP vs. FJUL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	6.33%	12.92%	6.30%
FJUL FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July	6.19%	14.19%	6.82%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFP and FJUL is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2024	0.92

The correlation between BUFP and FJUL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BUFP vs. FJUL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFP

BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 88
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 91
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

FJUL

FJUL Risk / Return Rank: 86
FJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
FJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
FJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 90
FJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
FJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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. FJUL - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (FJUL). 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.

	BUFP	FJUL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.72	2.73	0.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.02	3.97	+0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	1.55	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.94	3.70	+0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.61	19.46	+2.15

BUFP vs. FJUL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFP Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is comparable to the FJUL Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFP and FJUL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BUFP vs. FJUL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFP drawdown since its inception was -11.98%, smaller than the maximum FJUL drawdown of -13.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFP and FJUL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFP	FJUL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.98%	-13.08%	+1.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.41%	-5.10%	+0.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-13.08%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-0.04%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.99%	-1.86%	+0.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.80%	0.97%	-0.17%

Volatility

BUFP vs. FJUL - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) has a higher volatility of 1.99% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July (FJUL) at 1.22%. This indicates that BUFP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FJUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFP	FJUL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.99%	1.22%	+0.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.11%	5.18%	-0.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.40%	6.93%	-0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.46%	10.97%	-1.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.46%	10.53%	-1.07%

BUFP vs. FJUL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FJUL's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFP vs. FJUL - Dividend Comparison

BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, while FJUL has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%
FJUL FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - July	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFP and FJUL in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, BUFP and FJUL 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.

Which is riskier, BUFP or FJUL?

BUFP has higher volatility (1.99%) compared to FJUL (1.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFP dropped -11.98% vs FJUL's -13.08%.

Which ETF is better, BUFP or FJUL?

On 1-year performance, FJUL leads with 18.77% vs 17.31% for BUFP. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FJUL has been the lower-risk option at 1.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFP or FJUL?

Over the 1-year period, FJUL has performed better with a 18.77% return vs 17.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFP or FJUL?

BUFP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FJUL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFP or FJUL?

BUFP has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for FJUL.

What is the main difference between BUFP and FJUL?

BUFP is categorized as Defined Outcome, while FJUL is Options Trading. BUFP tracks S&P 500, while FJUL tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index July. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BUFP and 0.85% for FJUL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FJUL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs 2.72), 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.