PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FSEP vs. BUFQ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September (FSEP) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FSEP achieves a 6.56% return, which is significantly lower than BUFQ's 9.53% return.


FSEP

1D
-0.22%
1M
2.58%
YTD
6.56%
6M
7.03%
1Y
17.62%
3Y*
14.44%
5Y*
10.07%
10Y*

BUFQ

1D
-0.04%
1M
2.68%
YTD
9.53%
6M
10.14%
1Y
21.61%
3Y*
16.99%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
FSEP
FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September
6.56%12.83%13.56%20.23%7.48%
BUFQ
FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF
9.53%14.03%16.41%35.51%0.75%

Correlation

The correlation between FSEP and BUFQ is 0.90, 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

0.90

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.86

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2022

0.89

The correlation between FSEP and BUFQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FSEP
BUFQ

Technology

36.2%
54.2%

Financial Services

11.9%
0.2%

Communication Services

10.9%
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

10.1%
12.2%

Healthcare

8.4%
4.2%

Industrials

8.1%
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

4.9%
7.6%

Energy

3.5%
0.6%

Utilities

2.3%
1.4%

Real Estate

1.9%
0.1%

Basic Materials

1.8%
1.2%

Technology

FSEP
36.2%
BUFQ
54.2%

Financial Services

FSEP
11.9%
BUFQ
0.2%

Communication Services

FSEP
10.9%
BUFQ
15.5%

Consumer Cyclical

FSEP
10.1%
BUFQ
12.2%

Healthcare

FSEP
8.4%
BUFQ
4.2%

Industrials

FSEP
8.1%
BUFQ
2.8%

Consumer Defensive

FSEP
4.9%
BUFQ
7.6%

Energy

FSEP
3.5%
BUFQ
0.6%

Utilities

FSEP
2.3%
BUFQ
1.4%

Real Estate

FSEP
1.9%
BUFQ
0.1%

Basic Materials

FSEP
1.8%
BUFQ
1.2%

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

FSEP vs. BUFQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

FSEP
FSEP Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
FSEP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FSEP Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
FSEP Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
FSEP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
FSEP Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

BUFQ
BUFQ Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
BUFQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFQ Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFQ Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September (FSEP) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ). 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.


FSEPBUFQDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.36

2.62

-0.26

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.40

3.88

-0.48

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.47

1.53

-0.06

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.15

4.03

-0.87

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

15.90

20.34

-4.44

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FSEP Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is comparable to the BUFQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FSEP and BUFQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FSEPBUFQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.36

2.62

-0.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.94

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.10

1.42

-0.33

Drawdowns

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FSEP drawdown since its inception was -13.79%, smaller than the maximum BUFQ drawdown of -15.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FSEP and BUFQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FSEPBUFQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-13.79%

-15.74%

+1.95%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.62%

-5.39%

-0.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.37%

-15.74%

+3.37%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-13.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.22%

-0.04%

-0.18%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.14%

-2.31%

+0.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.11%

1.06%

+0.05%

Volatility

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - September (FSEP) and FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) have volatilities of 1.19% and 1.17%, 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FSEPBUFQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.19%

1.17%

+0.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.79%

6.42%

-0.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.52%

8.31%

-0.79%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

10.79%

13.35%

-2.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

10.54%

13.35%

-2.81%

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

FSEP has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFQ's 1.10% expense ratio.


Dividends

FSEP vs. BUFQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither FSEP nor BUFQ has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


FSEP and BUFQ have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FSEP has higher volatility (1.19%) compared to BUFQ (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FSEP dropped -13.79% vs BUFQ's -15.74%.

On 3-year performance, BUFQ leads with 16.99% vs 14.44% for FSEP. On fees, FSEP is cheaper at 0.85% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, BUFQ has performed better with a 16.99% return vs 14.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FSEP is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.

FSEP and BUFQ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

FSEP is categorized as Options Trading, while BUFQ is Nasdaq-100. FSEP tracks Cboe S&P 500 Buffer Protect Index September, while BUFQ tracks NASDAQ 100 Index - USD. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FSEP and 1.10% for BUFQ.

BUFQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 2.36), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FSEP and BUFQ

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