FCTE vs. BUFH

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

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. Over the past year, FCTE returned 11.33% vs 6.24% for BUFH. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FCTE charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.

Performance

FCTE vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SMI 3Fourteen Full-Cycle Trend ETF (FCTE) and FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCTE achieves a 17.12% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.88% return.

FCTE

• 1D: 0.39%
• 1M: 5.07%
• 6M: 12.63%
• YTD: 17.12%
• 1Y: 11.33%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFH

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 0.56%
• 6M: 2.66%
• YTD: 2.88%
• 1Y: 6.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FCTE vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FCTE SMI 3Fourteen Full-Cycle Trend ETF	17.12%	-5.60%
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF	2.88%	3.81%

Correlation

The correlation between FCTE and BUFH is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2025	0.50

The correlation between FCTE and BUFH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FCTE vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCTE

FCTE Risk / Return Rank: 22
FCTE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
FCTE Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
FCTE Omega Ratio Rank: 21
FCTE Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
FCTE Martin Ratio Rank: 22

BUFH

BUFH Risk / Return Rank: 93
BUFH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
BUFH Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
BUFH Omega Ratio Rank: 95
BUFH Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
BUFH Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

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.

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.

	FCTE	BUFH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.66	2.64	-1.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.05	4.15	-3.10
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.59	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.79	4.09	-3.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.20	19.22	-17.02

FCTE vs. BUFH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCTE Sharpe Ratio is 0.66, which is lower than the BUFH Sharpe Ratio of 2.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCTE and BUFH, 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

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	FCTE	BUFH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.68%	-1.53%	-18.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.85%	-1.53%	-11.32%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	0.00%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.76%	-0.17%	-5.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.59%	0.33%	+4.26%

Volatility

FCTE vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison

SMI 3Fourteen Full-Cycle Trend ETF (FCTE) has a higher volatility of 4.55% compared to FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH) at 0.60%. This indicates that FCTE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FCTE	BUFH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.55%	0.60%	+3.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.58%	1.97%	+10.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.26%	2.37%	+12.89%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.54%	2.34%	+16.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.54%	2.34%	+16.20%

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

Can I hold both FCTE and BUFH in my portfolio?

FCTE and BUFH have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FCTE or BUFH?

FCTE has higher volatility (4.55%) compared to BUFH (0.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCTE dropped -19.68% vs BUFH's -1.53%.

Which ETF is better, FCTE or BUFH?

On 1-year performance, FCTE leads with 11.33% vs 6.24% for BUFH. On fees, FCTE is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, BUFH has been the lower-risk option at 0.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FCTE or BUFH?

Over the 1-year period, FCTE has performed better with a 11.33% return vs 6.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FCTE or BUFH?

FCTE is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FCTE or BUFH?

FCTE has the higher dividend yield at 0.08%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.

What is the main difference between FCTE and 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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 0.66), 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.