CFO vs. BUFH
CFO (VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CFO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CFO charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.
Performance
CFO vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CFO achieves a 7.47% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.30% return.
CFO
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 1.25%
- YTD
- 7.47%
- 6M
- 6.58%
- 1Y
- 14.21%
- 3Y*
- 10.51%
- 5Y*
- 4.21%
- 10Y*
- 9.80%
BUFH
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 0.02%
- YTD
- 2.30%
- 6M
- 2.33%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CFO vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CFO VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF | 7.47% | 5.44% |
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 2.30% | 3.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between CFO and BUFH is 0.54, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2025 | 0.54 |
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
CFO vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank
CFO
BUFH
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CFO vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) and FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH). 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.
| CFO | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.01 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.42 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CFO vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CFO drawdown since its inception was -24.35%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFO and BUFH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CFO | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.35% | -1.53% | -22.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.10% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.25% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.35% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.35% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.05% | -0.26% | -0.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.60% | -0.18% | -5.42% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.92% | — | — |
Volatility
CFO vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CFO | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.02% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.03% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.91% | 2.38% | +8.53% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.33% | 2.38% | +10.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.23% | 2.38% | +10.85% |
CFO vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison
CFO has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
CFO vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison
CFO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.25%, while BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CFO VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF | 1.25% | 1.32% | 1.44% | 1.72% | 3.95% | 1.06% | 0.90% | 1.44% | 1.49% | 1.18% | 1.35% | 1.31% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CFO and BUFH have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CFO is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CFO is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.
CFO has the higher dividend yield at 1.25%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.
CFO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: VictoryShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CFO and 0.95% for BUFH.
Find the right allocation for CFO and BUFH
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