HCMT vs. BUFH
HCMT (Direxion HCM Tactical Enhanced U.S. Equity Strategy ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HCMT is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Direxion, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. HCMT charges 1.17%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.
Performance
HCMT vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HCMT achieves a 11.17% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.45% return.
HCMT
- 1D
- -0.89%
- 1M
- 14.82%
- YTD
- 11.17%
- 6M
- 9.27%
- 1Y
- 43.14%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFH
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 0.75%
- YTD
- 2.45%
- 6M
- 2.82%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HCMT vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
HCMT Direxion HCM Tactical Enhanced U.S. Equity Strategy ETF | 11.17% | 22.85% |
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 2.45% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between HCMT and BUFH is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025 | 0.65 |
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
HCMT vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank
HCMT
BUFH
HCMT vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion HCM Tactical Enhanced U.S. Equity Strategy ETF (HCMT) 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.
| HCMT | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.31 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.84 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.19 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HCMT | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.79 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.74 | 2.91 | -2.17 |
Drawdowns
HCMT vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HCMT drawdown since its inception was -36.26%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HCMT and BUFH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HCMT | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.26% | -1.53% | -34.73% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.27% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.89% | -0.05% | -0.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.24% | -0.18% | -8.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 6.01% | — | — |
Volatility
HCMT vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| HCMT | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.80% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.58% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 24.21% | 2.37% | +21.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.48% | 2.37% | +26.11% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.48% | 2.37% | +26.11% |
HCMT vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison
HCMT has a 1.17% expense ratio, which is higher than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
HCMT vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison
HCMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, while BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
HCMT Direxion HCM Tactical Enhanced U.S. Equity Strategy ETF | 0.38% | 0.43% | 2.75% | 0.63% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HCMT and BUFH have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BUFH is cheaper at 0.95% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BUFH is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.17% for HCMT.
HCMT has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.
HCMT is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 1.17% for HCMT and 0.95% for BUFH.
Find the right allocation for HCMT 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