FCTE vs. BUFH
FCTE (SMI 3Fourteen Full-Cycle Trend ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FCTE is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by SMI 3Fourteen, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FCTE charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.
Performance
FCTE vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FCTE achieves a 8.91% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.21% return.
FCTE
- 1D
- -0.88%
- 1M
- -0.24%
- YTD
- 8.91%
- 6M
- 7.45%
- 1Y
- 2.91%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFH
- 1D
- -0.26%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- 2.21%
- 6M
- 2.60%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FCTE vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FCTE SMI 3Fourteen Full-Cycle Trend ETF | 8.91% | -4.73% |
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 2.21% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between FCTE and BUFH is 0.48, 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 26, 2025 | 0.48 |
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
FCTE vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank
FCTE
BUFH
FCTE vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SMI 3Fourteen Full-Cycle Trend ETF (FCTE) 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.
| FCTE | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.05 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.23 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.63 | — | — |
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
| FCTE | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.20 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.29 | 2.76 | -2.47 |
Drawdowns
FCTE vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FCTE drawdown since its inception was -19.68%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCTE and BUFH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FCTE | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -19.68% | -1.53% | -18.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.85% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.10% | -0.28% | -2.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.01% | -0.18% | -5.83% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.66% | — | — |
Volatility
FCTE vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FCTE | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.77% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.35% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.99% | 2.38% | +12.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.68% | 2.38% | +16.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.68% | 2.38% | +16.30% |
FCTE vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison
FCTE has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
FCTE vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison
FCTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.08%, 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% |
FCTE SMI 3Fourteen Full-Cycle Trend ETF | 0.08% | 0.18% | 0.18% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FCTE and BUFH have a correlation of 0.48, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FCTE is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FCTE is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.
FCTE has the higher dividend yield at 0.08%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.
FCTE is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: SMI 3Fourteen and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FCTE and 0.95% for BUFH.
Find the right allocation for FCTE 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