CGUS vs. BUFH
CGUS (Capital Group Core Equity ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CGUS is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Capital Group, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CGUS charges 0.33%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.
Performance
CGUS vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CGUS achieves a 9.93% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.45% return.
CGUS
- 1D
- -0.74%
- 1M
- 3.74%
- YTD
- 9.93%
- 6M
- 10.08%
- 1Y
- 25.53%
- 3Y*
- 22.34%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFH
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 0.75%
- YTD
- 2.45%
- 6M
- 2.82%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CGUS vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CGUS Capital Group Core Equity ETF | 9.93% | 11.61% |
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 2.45% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between CGUS and BUFH is 0.72, 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 26, 2025 | 0.72 |
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
CGUS vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank
CGUS
BUFH
CGUS vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Capital Group Core Equity ETF (CGUS) 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.
| CGUS | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.08 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.83 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.67 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.44 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CGUS | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.08 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.97 | 2.91 | -1.93 |
Drawdowns
CGUS vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CGUS drawdown since its inception was -21.86%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CGUS and BUFH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CGUS | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.86% | -1.53% | -20.33% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.59% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.06% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.74% | -0.05% | -0.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.65% | -0.18% | -4.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.06% | — | — |
Volatility
CGUS vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CGUS | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.89% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.46% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.33% | 2.37% | +9.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.38% | 2.37% | +14.01% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.38% | 2.37% | +14.01% |
CGUS vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison
CGUS has a 0.33% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
CGUS vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison
CGUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, while BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CGUS Capital Group Core Equity ETF | 0.87% | 0.95% | 1.02% | 1.22% | 1.10% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CGUS and BUFH have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CGUS is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CGUS is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.
CGUS has the higher dividend yield at 0.87%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.
CGUS is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Capital Group and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.33% for CGUS and 0.95% for BUFH.
Find the right allocation for CGUS 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