BUFQ vs. DOGG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BUFQ (FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF) and DOGG (FT Vest DJIA Dogs 10 Target Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ 100 Index - USD, while DOGG is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by FT Vest. BUFQ is passively managed, while DOGG is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BUFQ returned 16.99%/yr vs 11.91%/yr for DOGG. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BUFQ charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for DOGG.

Performance

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) and FT Vest DJIA Dogs 10 Target Income ETF (DOGG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFQ achieves a 9.53% return, which is significantly higher than DOGG's 5.09% return.

BUFQ

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 2.68%
• YTD: 9.53%
• 6M: 10.14%
• 1Y: 21.61%
• 3Y*: 16.99%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DOGG

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.22%
• YTD: 5.09%
• 6M: 4.26%
• 1Y: 15.85%
• 3Y*: 11.91%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF	9.53%	14.03%	16.41%	16.74%
DOGG FT Vest DJIA Dogs 10 Target Income ETF	5.09%	19.43%	-2.58%	12.69%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFQ and DOGG is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.12
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2023	0.23

The correlation between BUFQ and DOGG shifts across timeframes, from 0.12 (1 year) to 0.23 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BUFQ	DOGG
Technology	54.2%	-
Communication Services	15.5%	10.2%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	30.1%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	19.9%
Healthcare	4.2%	29.9%
Industrials	2.8%	-
Utilities	1.4%	-
Basic Materials	1.2%	-
Energy	0.6%	10.0%
Financial Services	0.2%	-
Real Estate	0.1%	-

Return for Risk

BUFQ vs. DOGG — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFQ

BUFQ Risk / Return Rank: 84
BUFQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BUFQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
BUFQ Omega Ratio Rank: 85
BUFQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
BUFQ Martin Ratio Rank: 89

DOGG

DOGG Risk / Return Rank: 40
DOGG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
DOGG Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
DOGG Omega Ratio Rank: 41
DOGG Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
DOGG Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) and FT Vest DJIA Dogs 10 Target Income ETF (DOGG). 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.

	BUFQ	DOGG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.62	1.53	+1.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.88	2.22	+1.66
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.27	+0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.03	1.92	+2.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.34	4.53	+15.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.62, which is higher than the DOGG Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFQ and DOGG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BUFQ	DOGG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.62	1.53	+1.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.42	0.85	+0.58

Drawdowns

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFQ drawdown since its inception was -15.74%, which is greater than DOGG's maximum drawdown of -11.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFQ and DOGG.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFQ	DOGG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.74%	-11.19%	-4.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.39%	-8.29%	+2.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.74%	-11.19%	-4.55%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.04%	-7.62%	+7.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.31%	-3.22%	+0.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.06%	3.50%	-2.44%

Volatility

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) is 1.17%, while FT Vest DJIA Dogs 10 Target Income ETF (DOGG) has a volatility of 3.20%. This indicates that BUFQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DOGG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFQ	DOGG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.17%	3.20%	-2.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.42%	8.04%	-1.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.31%	10.43%	-2.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.35%	12.97%	+0.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.35%	12.97%	+0.38%

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFQ has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than DOGG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFQ vs. DOGG - Dividend Comparison

BUFQ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while DOGG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.90%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
DOGG FT Vest DJIA Dogs 10 Target Income ETF	8.90%	8.75%	9.92%	5.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFQ and DOGG in my portfolio?

BUFQ and DOGG have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUFQ or DOGG?

DOGG has higher volatility (3.20%) compared to BUFQ (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFQ dropped -15.74% vs DOGG's -11.19%.

Which ETF is better, BUFQ or DOGG?

On 3-year performance, BUFQ leads with 16.99% vs 11.91% for DOGG. On fees, DOGG is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, BUFQ has been the lower-risk option at 1.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFQ or DOGG?

Over the 3-year period, BUFQ has performed better with a 16.99% return vs 11.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFQ or DOGG?

DOGG is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFQ or DOGG?

DOGG has the higher dividend yield at 8.90%, compared with 0.00% for BUFQ.

What is the main difference between BUFQ and DOGG?

BUFQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while DOGG is Derivative Income. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for BUFQ and 0.75% for DOGG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 1.53), 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.