DNOV vs. BUFG

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

DNOV (FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - November) and BUFG (FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - DNOV is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500, while BUFG is a Options Trading fund actively managed by FT Vest. DNOV is passively managed, while BUFG is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, DNOV returned 13.20%/yr vs 14.41%/yr for BUFG. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. DNOV charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.05%/yr for BUFG.

Performance

DNOV vs. BUFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - November (DNOV) and FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, DNOV achieves a 4.96% return, which is significantly lower than BUFG's 6.72% return.

DNOV

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 1.74%
• YTD: 4.96%
• 6M: 5.56%
• 1Y: 18.05%
• 3Y*: 13.20%
• 5Y*: 8.18%
• 10Y*: —

BUFG

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 2.54%
• YTD: 6.72%
• 6M: 7.58%
• 1Y: 18.52%
• 3Y*: 14.41%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

DNOV vs. BUFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
DNOV FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - November	4.96%	13.93%	10.71%	18.52%	-7.50%	0.71%
BUFG FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF	6.72%	12.33%	15.13%	18.49%	-11.61%	1.80%

Correlation

The correlation between DNOV and BUFG is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 28, 2021	0.89

The correlation between DNOV and BUFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

DNOV vs. BUFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	DNOV	BUFG
Technology	36.2%	36.2%
Financial Services	11.9%	11.9%
Communication Services	10.9%	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	10.1%	10.1%
Healthcare	8.4%	8.4%
Industrials	8.1%	8.1%
Consumer Defensive	4.9%	4.9%
Energy	3.5%	3.5%
Utilities	2.3%	2.3%
Real Estate	1.9%	1.9%
Basic Materials	1.8%	1.8%

Return for Risk

DNOV vs. BUFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

DNOV

DNOV Risk / Return Rank: 90
DNOV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
DNOV Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
DNOV Omega Ratio Rank: 93
DNOV Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
DNOV Martin Ratio Rank: 92

BUFG

BUFG Risk / Return Rank: 75
BUFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
BUFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
BUFG Omega Ratio Rank: 78
BUFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
BUFG Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

DNOV vs. BUFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - November (DNOV) and FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG). 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.

	DNOV	BUFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.17	2.44	+0.73
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	4.78	3.52	+1.26
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.67	1.47	+0.19
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	3.26	+1.11
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	23.48	17.20	+6.28
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

DNOV vs. BUFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current DNOV Sharpe Ratio is 3.17, which is comparable to the BUFG Sharpe Ratio of 2.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of DNOV and BUFG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	DNOV	BUFG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.17	2.44	+0.73
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.08	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	0.74	+0.17

Drawdowns

DNOV vs. BUFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum DNOV drawdown since its inception was -15.03%, smaller than the maximum BUFG drawdown of -17.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for DNOV and BUFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	DNOV	BUFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.03%	-17.62%	+2.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.18%	-5.74%	+1.56%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.98%	-13.20%	+3.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-9.98%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.01%	-3.62%	+1.61%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.78%	1.09%	-0.31%

Volatility

DNOV vs. BUFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - November (DNOV) is 0.85%, while FT Cboe Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) has a volatility of 1.14%. This indicates that DNOV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	DNOV	BUFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.85%	1.14%	-0.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.21%	5.82%	-1.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.73%	7.63%	-1.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.62%	11.84%	-4.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.04%	11.84%	-2.80%

DNOV vs. BUFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

DNOV has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFG's 1.05% expense ratio.

Dividends

DNOV vs. BUFG - Dividend Comparison

Neither DNOV nor BUFG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both DNOV and BUFG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, DNOV and BUFG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, DNOV or BUFG?

BUFG has higher volatility (1.14%) compared to DNOV (0.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, DNOV dropped -15.03% vs BUFG's -17.62%.

Which ETF is better, DNOV or BUFG?

On 3-year performance, BUFG leads with 14.41% vs 13.20% for DNOV. On fees, DNOV is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, DNOV has been the lower-risk option at 0.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, DNOV or BUFG?

Over the 3-year period, BUFG has performed better with a 14.41% return vs 13.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, DNOV or BUFG?

DNOV is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.05% for BUFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, DNOV or BUFG?

DNOV and BUFG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between DNOV and BUFG?

DNOV is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BUFG is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for DNOV and 1.05% for BUFG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DNOV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.17 vs 2.44), 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.