SGLC vs. BUFH
SGLC (SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SGLC is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Summit Global Investments, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SGLC charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.
Performance
SGLC vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SGLC achieves a 14.85% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.47% return.
SGLC
- 1D
- 0.35%
- 1M
- 5.34%
- YTD
- 14.85%
- 6M
- 16.84%
- 1Y
- 33.91%
- 3Y*
- 22.49%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFH
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.66%
- YTD
- 2.47%
- 6M
- 2.94%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SGLC vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
SGLC SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF | 14.85% | 15.34% |
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 2.47% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between SGLC and BUFH is 0.67, 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 | 0.67 |
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
SGLC vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank
SGLC
BUFH
SGLC vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF (SGLC) 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.
| SGLC | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.52 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.67 | — | — |
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
| SGLC | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.53 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.44 | 2.91 | -1.47 |
Drawdowns
SGLC vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SGLC drawdown since its inception was -20.24%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGLC and BUFH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SGLC | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.24% | -1.53% | -18.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -9.67% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.24% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.08% | -0.02% | -0.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.45% | -0.18% | -2.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.17% | — | — |
Volatility
SGLC vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SGLC | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.26% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.04% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.49% | 2.36% | +11.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.03% | 2.36% | +13.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.03% | 2.36% | +13.67% |
SGLC vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison
SGLC has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
SGLC vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison
SGLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.20%, 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% |
SGLC SGI U.S. Large Cap Core ETF | 0.20% | 0.23% | 8.68% | 1.49% |
Frequently Asked Questions
SGLC and BUFH have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SGLC is cheaper at 0.85% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SGLC is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.
SGLC has the higher dividend yield at 0.20%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.
SGLC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Summit Global Investments and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for SGLC and 0.95% for BUFH.
Find the right allocation for SGLC 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