FEAC vs. BUFH
FEAC (Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FEAC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Fidelity, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FEAC charges 0.18%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.
Performance
FEAC vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FEAC achieves a 12.42% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.45% return.
FEAC
- 1D
- -0.54%
- 1M
- 6.25%
- YTD
- 12.42%
- 6M
- 13.00%
- 1Y
- 30.36%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFH
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 0.75%
- YTD
- 2.45%
- 6M
- 2.82%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FEAC vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FEAC Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF | 12.42% | 13.43% |
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 2.45% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between FEAC and BUFH is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025 | 0.73 |
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
FEAC vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank
FEAC
BUFH
FEAC vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF (FEAC) 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.
| FEAC | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.44 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.33 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.43 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.74 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.36 | — | — |
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
| FEAC | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.44 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.10 | 2.91 | -1.81 |
Drawdowns
FEAC vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FEAC drawdown since its inception was -18.96%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEAC and BUFH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FEAC | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.96% | -1.53% | -17.43% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.15% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.54% | -0.05% | -0.49% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.55% | -0.18% | -2.37% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.86% | — | — |
Volatility
FEAC vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FEAC | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.10% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.15% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.51% | 2.37% | +10.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.50% | 2.37% | +15.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.50% | 2.37% | +15.13% |
FEAC vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison
FEAC has a 0.18% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
FEAC vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison
FEAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.85%, 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% |
FEAC Fidelity Enhanced U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF | 0.85% | 0.94% | 0.12% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FEAC and BUFH have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FEAC is cheaper at 0.18% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FEAC is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.
FEAC has the higher dividend yield at 0.85%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.
FEAC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.18% for FEAC and 0.95% for BUFH.
Find the right allocation for FEAC 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