FAUG vs. GXLC
FAUG (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August) and GXLC (Global X U.S. 500 ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds - FAUG tracks the Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index August while GXLC tracks the Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. Both are passively managed. With a 0.97 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FAUG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.02%/yr for GXLC.
Performance
FAUG vs. GXLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FAUG achieves a 6.33% return, which is significantly lower than GXLC's 9.76% return.
FAUG
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 0.63%
- YTD
- 6.33%
- 6M
- 6.20%
- 1Y
- 18.25%
- 3Y*
- 14.11%
- 5Y*
- 8.87%
- 10Y*
- —
GXLC
- 1D
- -0.47%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 9.76%
- 6M
- 9.33%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FAUG vs. GXLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FAUG FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August | 6.33% | 2.38% |
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF | 9.76% | 3.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between FAUG and GXLC is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.97 |
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
FAUG vs. GXLC — Risk / Return Rank
FAUG
GXLC
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
FAUG vs. GXLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August (FAUG) and Global X U.S. 500 ETF (GXLC). 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.
| FAUG | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.51 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.49 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 17.57 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FAUG vs. GXLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FAUG drawdown since its inception was -22.33%, which is greater than GXLC's maximum drawdown of -9.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAUG and GXLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FAUG | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.33% | -9.08% | -13.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.26% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.81% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.91% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.09% | -1.76% | +1.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.82% | -1.53% | -1.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.04% | — | — |
Volatility
FAUG vs. GXLC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FAUG | GXLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.70% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.59% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.17% | 13.79% | -6.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.79% | 13.79% | -3.00% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.72% | 13.79% | -1.07% |
FAUG vs. GXLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
FAUG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than GXLC's 0.02% expense ratio.
Dividends
FAUG vs. GXLC - Dividend Comparison
FAUG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while GXLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.64%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
FAUG FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - August | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GXLC Global X U.S. 500 ETF | 0.64% | 0.30% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.97, FAUG and GXLC 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.
On fees, GXLC is cheaper at 0.02% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
GXLC is cheaper with a 0.02% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FAUG.
GXLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.64%, compared with 0.00% for FAUG.
FAUG tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index August, while GXLC tracks Solactive GBS United States 500 Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FAUG and 0.02% for GXLC.
Find the right allocation for FAUG and GXLC
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