CLSE vs. BUFZ

Last updated Jun 28, 2026

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

Performance

CLSE vs. BUFZ - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

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

CLSE

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

BUFZ

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

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

CLSE vs. BUFZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

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

Correlation

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

Return for Risk

CLSE vs. BUFZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

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

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

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.

CLSE vs. BUFZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

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

CLSE vs. BUFZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

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

CLSE vs. BUFZ - Drawdown Comparison

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

Drawdown Indicators

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

Volatility

CLSE vs. BUFZ - Volatility Comparison

Convergence Long/Short Equity ETF (CLSE) has a higher volatility of 4.22% compared to FT Cboe Vest Laddered Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFZ) at 1.52%. This indicates that CLSE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

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

CLSE vs. BUFZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

CLSE vs. BUFZ - Dividend Comparison

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

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 CLSE and BUFZ in my portfolio?

CLSE and BUFZ 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, CLSE or BUFZ?

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

Which ETF is better, CLSE or BUFZ?

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, CLSE or BUFZ?

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, CLSE or BUFZ?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between CLSE and BUFZ?

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

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.