GFEB vs. BUFD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

GFEB (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February) and BUFD (FT Vest Laddered Deep Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GFEB is a Options Trading fund tracking the NONE, while BUFD is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by FT Vest. GFEB is passively managed, while BUFD is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, GFEB returned 12.38%/yr vs 11.59%/yr for BUFD. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. GFEB charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFD.

Performance

GFEB vs. BUFD - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GFEB achieves a 5.26% return, which is significantly higher than BUFD's 4.55% return.

GFEB

• 1D: -0.38%
• 1M: -0.13%
• YTD: 5.26%
• 6M: 5.20%
• 1Y: 13.99%
• 3Y*: 12.38%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFD

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: -0.08%
• YTD: 4.55%
• 6M: 4.29%
• 1Y: 13.12%
• 3Y*: 11.59%
• 5Y*: 7.32%
• 10Y*: —

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

GFEB vs. BUFD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GFEB FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February	5.26%	11.19%	13.06%	13.06%
BUFD FT Vest Laddered Deep Buffer ETF	4.55%	10.66%	12.42%	12.32%

Correlation

The correlation between GFEB and BUFD is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 21, 2023	0.86

The correlation between GFEB and BUFD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GFEB vs. BUFD — Risk / Return Rank

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

GFEB

GFEB Risk / Return Rank: 84
GFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
GFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
GFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 89
GFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
GFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 86

BUFD

BUFD Risk / Return Rank: 86
BUFD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
BUFD Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
BUFD Omega Ratio Rank: 88
BUFD Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
BUFD 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.

GFEB vs. BUFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) and FT Vest Laddered Deep Buffer ETF (BUFD). 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.

	GFEB	BUFD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.53	2.51	+0.02
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.73	3.81	-0.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.51	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.15	3.84	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.75	20.61	-3.85

GFEB vs. BUFD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GFEB Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the BUFD Sharpe Ratio of 2.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GFEB and BUFD, 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

GFEB vs. BUFD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GFEB drawdown since its inception was -9.63%, smaller than the maximum BUFD drawdown of -10.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFEB and BUFD.

Drawdown Indicators

	GFEB	BUFD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.63%	-10.75%	+1.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.46%	-3.43%	-1.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.63%	-10.15%	+0.52%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-10.75%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.77%	-0.72%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.70%	-1.95%	+1.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.84%	0.64%	+0.20%

Volatility

GFEB vs. BUFD - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) and FT Vest Laddered Deep Buffer ETF (BUFD) have volatilities of 1.72% and 1.67%, 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

	GFEB	BUFD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.72%	1.67%	+0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.45%	4.18%	+0.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.58%	5.29%	+0.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.57%	7.75%	-0.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.57%	7.54%	+0.03%

GFEB vs. BUFD - Expense Ratio Comparison

GFEB has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFD's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

GFEB vs. BUFD - Dividend Comparison

Neither GFEB nor BUFD has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GFEB and BUFD in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, GFEB and BUFD 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, GFEB or BUFD?

GFEB has higher volatility (1.72%) compared to BUFD (1.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GFEB dropped -9.63% vs BUFD's -10.75%.

Which ETF is better, GFEB or BUFD?

On 3-year performance, GFEB leads with 12.38% vs 11.59% for BUFD. On fees, GFEB 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.

Which ETF has performed better, GFEB or BUFD?

Over the 3-year period, GFEB has performed better with a 12.38% return vs 11.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GFEB or BUFD?

GFEB is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GFEB or BUFD?

GFEB and BUFD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between GFEB and BUFD?

GFEB is categorized as Options Trading, while BUFD is Defined Outcome. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for GFEB and 0.95% for BUFD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GFEB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.51), 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.