FMAR vs. BUFP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FMAR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March) and BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. FMAR is actively managed, while BUFP is passively managed. Over the past year, FMAR returned 19.13% vs 17.24% for BUFP. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FMAR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for BUFP.

Performance

FMAR vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FMAR achieves a 10.02% return, which is significantly higher than BUFP's 6.23% return.

FMAR

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 1.97%
• YTD: 10.02%
• 6M: 11.01%
• 1Y: 19.13%
• 3Y*: 14.55%
• 5Y*: 10.77%
• 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)

FMAR vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FMAR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March	10.02%	9.69%	7.06%
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	6.23%	12.92%	6.36%

Correlation

The correlation between FMAR and BUFP is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024	0.90

The correlation between FMAR and BUFP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

FMAR vs. BUFP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FMAR	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

FMAR vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank

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

FMAR

FMAR Risk / Return Rank: 96
FMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
FMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
FMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 97
FMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
FMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

FMAR vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR) 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.

	FMAR	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.79	2.77	+1.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.08	4.12	+1.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.94	1.58	+0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.14	3.93	+4.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	56.00	21.96	+34.04
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FMAR vs. BUFP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.79, which is higher than the BUFP Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FMAR 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

	FMAR	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.79	2.77	+1.02
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	1.04	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.10	1.40	-0.29

Drawdowns

FMAR vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FMAR drawdown since its inception was -14.36%, which is greater than BUFP's maximum drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FMAR and BUFP.

Drawdown Indicators

	FMAR	BUFP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.36%	-11.98%	-2.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.36%	-4.41%	+2.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.37%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.36%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.21%	-0.22%	+0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.14%	-1.00%	-1.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.34%	0.79%	-0.45%

Volatility

FMAR vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) have volatilities of 0.98% and 0.95%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FMAR	BUFP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.98%	0.95%	+0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.95%	4.82%	-0.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.08%	6.27%	-1.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.45%	9.49%	+0.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.35%	9.49%	+0.86%

FMAR vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

FMAR vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison

FMAR 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%
FMAR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FMAR and BUFP in my portfolio?

FMAR and BUFP have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FMAR or BUFP?

FMAR has higher volatility (0.98%) compared to BUFP (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FMAR dropped -14.36% vs BUFP's -11.98%.

Which ETF is better, FMAR or BUFP?

On 1-year performance, FMAR leads with 19.13% vs 17.24% for BUFP. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FMAR or BUFP?

Over the 1-year period, FMAR has performed better with a 19.13% return vs 17.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FMAR or BUFP?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between FMAR and BUFP?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FMAR and 0.50% for BUFP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.79 vs 2.77), 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.