LTTI vs. BUFQ
LTTI (FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF) and BUFQ (FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LTTI is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by FT Vest, while BUFQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the NASDAQ 100 Index - USD. LTTI is actively managed, while BUFQ is passively managed. Over the past year, LTTI returned 4.48% vs 21.61% for BUFQ. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LTTI charges 0.65%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for BUFQ.
Performance
LTTI vs. BUFQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LTTI achieves a -1.05% return, which is significantly lower than BUFQ's 9.53% return.
LTTI
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- -1.05%
- 6M
- -2.14%
- 1Y
- 4.48%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFQ
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 2.68%
- YTD
- 9.53%
- 6M
- 10.14%
- 1Y
- 21.61%
- 3Y*
- 16.99%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
LTTI vs. BUFQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LTTI FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF | -1.05% | 2.30% |
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF | 9.53% | 10.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between LTTI and BUFQ is 0.15, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.15 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2025 | 0.11 |
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
LTTI vs. BUFQ — Risk / Return Rank
LTTI
BUFQ
LTTI vs. BUFQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF (LTTI) 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.
| LTTI | BUFQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.12 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.09 | 1.53 | -0.44 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.64 | 4.03 | -3.39 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.57 | 20.34 | -18.77 |
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
| LTTI | BUFQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.50 | 2.62 | -2.12 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.09 | 1.42 | -1.33 |
Drawdowns
LTTI vs. BUFQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LTTI drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, smaller than the maximum BUFQ drawdown of -15.74%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LTTI and BUFQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LTTI | BUFQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.02% | -15.74% | +6.72% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.08% | -5.39% | -1.69% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -15.74% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.69% | -0.04% | -4.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.65% | -2.31% | -1.34% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.86% | 1.06% | +1.80% |
Volatility
LTTI vs. BUFQ - Volatility Comparison
FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF (LTTI) has a higher volatility of 2.56% compared to FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF (BUFQ) at 1.17%. This indicates that LTTI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LTTI | BUFQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.56% | 1.17% | +1.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.06% | 6.42% | -0.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.92% | 8.31% | +0.61% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.28% | 13.35% | -3.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.28% | 13.35% | -3.07% |
LTTI vs. BUFQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
LTTI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFQ's 1.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
LTTI vs. BUFQ - Dividend Comparison
LTTI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.21%, while BUFQ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
BUFQ FT Vest Laddered Nasdaq Buffer ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
LTTI FT Vest 20+ Year Treasury & Target Income ETF | 9.21% | 7.08% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LTTI and BUFQ have a correlation of 0.15, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LTTI has higher volatility (2.56%) compared to BUFQ (1.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LTTI dropped -9.02% vs BUFQ's -15.74%.
On 1-year performance, BUFQ leads with 21.61% vs 4.48% for LTTI. On fees, LTTI is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, BUFQ has been the lower-risk option at 1.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BUFQ has performed better with a 21.61% return vs 4.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LTTI is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for BUFQ.
LTTI has the higher dividend yield at 9.21%, compared with 0.00% for BUFQ.
LTTI is categorized as Derivative Income, while BUFQ is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for LTTI and 1.10% for BUFQ.
BUFQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 0.50), 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.
Find the right allocation for LTTI 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