BUFZ vs. CLSE

Last updated Jun 28, 2026

BUFZ (FT Cboe Vest Laddered Moderate Buffer ETF) and CLSE (Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFZ is a Options Trading fund actively managed by FT Vest, while CLSE is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Convergence Investment Partners. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BUFZ returned 11.41% vs 44.98% for CLSE. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BUFZ charges 1.05%/yr vs 1.52%/yr for CLSE.

Performance

BUFZ vs. CLSE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest Laddered Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFZ) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFZ achieves a 4.49% return, which is significantly lower than CLSE's 23.89% return.

BUFZ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.47%
• YTD: 4.49%
• 6M: 4.25%
• 1Y: 11.41%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLSE

• 1D: -1.25%
• 1M: 0.18%
• YTD: 23.89%
• 6M: 22.06%
• 1Y: 44.98%
• 3Y*: 31.08%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFZ vs. CLSE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BUFZ FT Cboe Vest Laddered Moderate Buffer ETF	4.49%	11.05%	11.48%	8.75%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	23.89%	20.44%	35.54%	6.90%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFZ and CLSE is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 26, 2023	0.62

The correlation between BUFZ and CLSE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BUFZ vs. CLSE — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFZ

BUFZ Risk / Return Rank: 85
BUFZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
BUFZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
BUFZ Omega Ratio Rank: 88
BUFZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
BUFZ Martin Ratio Rank: 90

CLSE

CLSE Risk / Return Rank: 95
CLSE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
CLSE Omega Ratio Rank: 93
CLSE Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
CLSE Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

BUFZ vs. CLSE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest Laddered Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFZ) and Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE). 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.

	BUFZ	CLSE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.28	3.33	-1.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.45	4.51	-1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.47	1.58	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.36	9.40	-6.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.75	33.97	-16.22

BUFZ vs. CLSE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.28, which is lower than the CLSE Sharpe Ratio of 3.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFZ and CLSE, 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

BUFZ vs. CLSE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFZ drawdown since its inception was -10.14%, smaller than the maximum CLSE drawdown of -16.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFZ and CLSE.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFZ	CLSE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.14%	-16.45%	+6.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.51%	-4.85%	+1.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.45%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.72%	-1.71%	+0.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.64%	-3.56%	+2.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.66%	1.34%	-0.68%

Volatility

BUFZ vs. CLSE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest Laddered Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFZ) is 1.52%, while Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) has a volatility of 4.22%. This indicates that BUFZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLSE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFZ	CLSE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.52%	4.22%	-2.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.20%	10.61%	-6.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.17%	13.71%	-8.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.29%	13.92%	-6.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.29%	13.92%	-6.63%

BUFZ vs. CLSE - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFZ has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is lower than CLSE's 1.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFZ vs. CLSE - Dividend Comparison

BUFZ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CLSE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.77%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BUFZ FT Cboe Vest Laddered Moderate Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CLSE Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF	0.77%	0.95%	0.93%	1.21%	0.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFZ and CLSE in my portfolio?

BUFZ and CLSE have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUFZ or CLSE?

CLSE has higher volatility (4.22%) compared to BUFZ (1.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFZ dropped -10.14% vs CLSE's -16.45%.

Which ETF is better, BUFZ or CLSE?

On 1-year performance, CLSE leads with 44.98% vs 11.41% for BUFZ. On fees, BUFZ is cheaper at 1.05% per year. On volatility, BUFZ has been the lower-risk option at 1.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFZ or CLSE?

Over the 1-year period, CLSE has performed better with a 44.98% return vs 11.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFZ or CLSE?

BUFZ is cheaper with a 1.05% expense ratio, compared with 1.52% for CLSE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFZ or CLSE?

CLSE has the higher dividend yield at 0.77%, compared with 0.00% for BUFZ.

What is the main difference between BUFZ and CLSE?

BUFZ is categorized as Options Trading, while CLSE is Long-Short. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and Convergence Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 1.05% for BUFZ and 1.52% for CLSE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CLSE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.33 vs 2.28), 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.