FJAN vs. BUFP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FJAN (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - January) and BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds tracking the S&P 500, from FT Vest and PGIM respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FJAN returned 18.90% vs 17.24% for BUFP. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FJAN charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for BUFP.

Performance

FJAN vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - January (FJAN) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with FJAN having a 6.51% return and BUFP slightly lower at 6.23%.

FJAN

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 2.55%
• YTD: 6.51%
• 6M: 7.67%
• 1Y: 18.90%
• 3Y*: 15.10%
• 5Y*: 11.19%
• 10Y*: —

BUFP

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 2.04%
• YTD: 6.23%
• 6M: 7.00%
• 1Y: 17.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FJAN vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FJAN FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - January	6.51%	12.74%	6.18%
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	6.23%	12.92%	6.36%

Correlation

The correlation between FJAN and BUFP 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024	0.89

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

FJAN vs. BUFP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FJAN	BUFP
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

FJAN vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank

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

FJAN

FJAN Risk / Return Rank: 79
FJAN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
FJAN Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
FJAN Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FJAN Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
FJAN Martin Ratio Rank: 83

BUFP

BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 86
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 89
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

FJAN vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - January (FJAN) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). 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.

	FJAN	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.57	2.77	-0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.70	4.12	-0.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.58	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.21	3.93	-0.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.85	21.96	-5.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FJAN vs. BUFP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FJAN Sharpe Ratio is 2.57, which is comparable to the BUFP Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FJAN and BUFP, 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

	FJAN	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.57	2.77	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.07	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.14	1.40	-0.26

Drawdowns

FJAN vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FJAN drawdown since its inception was -13.58%, which is greater than BUFP's maximum drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FJAN and BUFP.

Drawdown Indicators

	FJAN	BUFP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.58%	-11.98%	-1.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.91%	-4.41%	-1.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.58%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.28%	-0.22%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.00%	-1.00%	-1.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.12%	0.79%	+0.33%

Volatility

FJAN vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - January (FJAN) has a higher volatility of 1.36% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) at 0.95%. This indicates that FJAN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FJAN	BUFP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.36%	0.95%	+0.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.81%	4.82%	+0.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.38%	6.27%	+1.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.49%	9.49%	+1.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.39%	9.49%	+0.90%

FJAN vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison

FJAN has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than BUFP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

FJAN vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison

FJAN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%
FJAN FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - January	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FJAN and BUFP in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, FJAN and BUFP 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, FJAN or BUFP?

FJAN has higher volatility (1.36%) compared to BUFP (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FJAN dropped -13.58% vs BUFP's -11.98%.

Which ETF is better, FJAN or BUFP?

On 1-year performance, FJAN leads with 18.90% vs 17.24% for BUFP. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BUFP has been the lower-risk option at 0.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FJAN or BUFP?

Over the 1-year period, FJAN has performed better with a 18.90% return vs 17.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FJAN or BUFP?

BUFP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FJAN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FJAN or BUFP?

BUFP has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for FJAN.

What is the main difference between FJAN and BUFP?

Both ETFs track S&P 500. They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FJAN and 0.50% for BUFP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 vs 2.57), 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.