CZAR vs. BUFH
CZAR (Themes Natural Monopoly ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CZAR is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Solactive Natural Monopoly Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CZAR charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.
Performance
CZAR vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CZAR achieves a -3.66% return, which is significantly lower than BUFH's 2.30% return.
CZAR
- 1D
- -0.36%
- 1M
- -3.86%
- YTD
- -3.66%
- 6M
- -3.68%
- 1Y
- 0.92%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFH
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 0.02%
- YTD
- 2.30%
- 6M
- 2.33%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CZAR vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CZAR Themes Natural Monopoly ETF | -3.66% | 3.95% |
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 2.30% | 3.81% |
Correlation
The correlation between CZAR and BUFH is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2025 | 0.49 |
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
CZAR vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank
CZAR
BUFH
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CZAR vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) 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.
| CZAR | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.02 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.10 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.29 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CZAR vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CZAR drawdown since its inception was -13.38%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZAR and BUFH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CZAR | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.38% | -1.53% | -11.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.54% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.32% | -0.26% | -6.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.23% | -0.18% | -2.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.23% | — | — |
Volatility
CZAR vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CZAR | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.88% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.96% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.13% | 2.38% | +9.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.98% | 2.38% | +12.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.98% | 2.38% | +12.60% |
CZAR vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison
CZAR has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
CZAR vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison
CZAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.53%, while BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CZAR Themes Natural Monopoly ETF | 1.53% | 1.47% | 0.94% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CZAR and BUFH have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CZAR is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CZAR is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.
CZAR has the higher dividend yield at 1.53%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.
CZAR is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Themes and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CZAR and 0.95% for BUFH.
Find the right allocation for CZAR 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