BUFQ vs. GFEB

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

BUFQ (FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF) and GFEB (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ 100 Index - USD, while GFEB is a Options Trading fund tracking the NONE. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BUFQ returned 15.65%/yr vs 12.13%/yr for GFEB. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BUFQ charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GFEB.

Performance

BUFQ vs. GFEB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFQ achieves a 9.18% return, which is significantly higher than GFEB's 6.50% return.

BUFQ

• 1D: 0.57%
• 1M: 0.49%
• 6M: 8.18%
• YTD: 9.18%
• 1Y: 17.44%
• 3Y*: 15.65%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GFEB

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 1.06%
• 6M: 5.85%
• YTD: 6.50%
• 1Y: 12.77%
• 3Y*: 12.13%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFQ vs. GFEB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF	9.18%	14.03%	16.41%	23.11%
GFEB FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February	6.50%	11.19%	13.06%	13.06%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFQ and GFEB is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2023	0.85

The correlation between BUFQ and GFEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BUFQ vs. GFEB — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFQ

BUFQ Risk / Return Rank: 83
BUFQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BUFQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
BUFQ Omega Ratio Rank: 83
BUFQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
BUFQ Martin Ratio Rank: 90

GFEB

GFEB Risk / Return Rank: 86
GFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
GFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
GFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 90
GFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
GFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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. GFEB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) and FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB). 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.

	BUFQ	GFEB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.02	2.31	-0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.97	3.42	-0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.46	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.25	2.87	+0.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.81	15.20	+0.61

BUFQ vs. GFEB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.02, which is comparable to the GFEB Sharpe Ratio of 2.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFQ and GFEB, 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

BUFQ vs. GFEB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFQ drawdown since its inception was -15.74%, which is greater than GFEB's maximum drawdown of -9.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFQ and GFEB.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFQ	GFEB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.74%	-9.63%	-6.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.39%	-4.46%	-0.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.74%	-9.63%	-6.11%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.41%	-0.16%	-0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.27%	-0.69%	-1.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.11%	0.84%	+0.27%

Volatility

BUFQ vs. GFEB - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) has a higher volatility of 3.12% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) at 1.42%. This indicates that BUFQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GFEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFQ	GFEB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.12%	1.42%	+1.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.99%	4.53%	+2.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.66%	5.55%	+3.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.28%	7.52%	+5.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.28%	7.52%	+5.76%

BUFQ vs. GFEB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFQ has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than GFEB's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFQ vs. GFEB - Dividend Comparison

Neither BUFQ nor GFEB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFQ and GFEB in my portfolio?

BUFQ and GFEB have a correlation of 0.87, 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 GFEB?

BUFQ has higher volatility (3.12%) compared to GFEB (1.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFQ dropped -15.74% vs GFEB's -9.63%.

Which ETF is better, BUFQ or GFEB?

On 3-year performance, BUFQ leads with 15.65% vs 12.13% for GFEB. On fees, GFEB is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, GFEB has been the lower-risk option at 1.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFQ or GFEB?

Over the 3-year period, BUFQ has performed better with a 15.65% return vs 12.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFQ or GFEB?

GFEB is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.

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

BUFQ and GFEB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between BUFQ and GFEB?

BUFQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while GFEB is Options Trading. BUFQ tracks NASDAQ 100 Index - USD, while GFEB tracks NONE. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for BUFQ and 0.85% for GFEB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GFEB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.31 vs 2.02), 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.