PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GUSA vs. BUFH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GUSA vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) and FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GUSA achieves a 8.07% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.30% return.


GUSA

1D
0.01%
1M
-1.89%
YTD
8.07%
6M
6.74%
1Y
21.87%
3Y*
20.76%
5Y*
10Y*

BUFH

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
2.30%
6M
2.28%
1Y
6.28%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GUSA vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between GUSA and BUFH is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2025

0.76

The correlation between GUSA and BUFH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

GUSA vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank

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

GUSA
GUSA Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
GUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
GUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
GUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
GUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

BUFH
BUFH Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
BUFH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFH Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFH Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFH Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFH Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
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.

GUSA vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) 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.

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.


GUSABUFHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.31

1.59

-0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.44

4.11

-1.68

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.74

19.34

-8.61

GUSA vs. BUFH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GUSA Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is lower than the BUFH Sharpe Ratio of 2.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GUSA and BUFH, 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...

Drawdowns

GUSA vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GUSA drawdown since its inception was -19.61%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GUSA and BUFH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GUSABUFHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-19.61%

-1.53%

-18.08%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.01%

-1.53%

-7.48%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.61%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.11%

-0.26%

-2.85%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.35%

-0.18%

-4.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.04%

0.33%

+1.71%

Volatility

GUSA vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF (GUSA) has a higher volatility of 4.67% compared to FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH) at 0.62%. This indicates that GUSA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GUSABUFHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.67%

0.62%

+4.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.05%

1.96%

+8.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.74%

2.37%

+10.37%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.28%

2.37%

+14.91%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.28%

2.37%

+14.91%

GUSA vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison

GUSA has a 0.11% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

GUSA vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison

GUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, while BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
BUFH
FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
GUSA
Goldman Sachs MarketBeta U.S. 1000 Equity ETF
1.00%0.99%1.16%1.36%1.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


GUSA and BUFH have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GUSA has higher volatility (4.67%) compared to BUFH (0.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GUSA dropped -19.61% vs BUFH's -1.53%.

On 1-year performance, GUSA leads with 21.87% vs 6.28% for BUFH. On fees, GUSA is cheaper at 0.11% per year. On volatility, BUFH has been the lower-risk option at 0.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, GUSA has performed better with a 21.87% return vs 6.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

GUSA is cheaper with a 0.11% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.

GUSA has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.

GUSA is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.11% for GUSA and 0.95% for BUFH.

BUFH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.66 vs 1.72), 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 GUSA 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