SMCP vs. BUFC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SMCP (AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF) and BUFC (AB Conservative Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SMCP is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Actively Managed, while BUFC is a Options Trading fund actively managed by AllianceBernstein. SMCP is passively managed, while BUFC is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.16, they often move in opposite directions. SMCP charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for BUFC.

Performance

SMCP vs. BUFC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF (SMCP) and AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

SMCP

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: -25.99%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFC

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 1.58%
• YTD: 2.84%
• 6M: 3.28%
• 1Y: 8.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SMCP vs. BUFC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
SMCP AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF	-25.99%
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	2.14%

Correlation

The correlation between SMCP and BUFC is -0.16, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 9, 2026	-0.16

SMCP vs. BUFC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SMCP	BUFC
Financial Services	98.8%	12.5%
Industrials	13.1%	8.6%
Technology	11.1%	33.6%
Healthcare	11.0%	9.6%
Consumer Defensive	8.1%	5.3%
Basic Materials	7.9%	1.9%
Energy	7.6%	3.4%
Consumer Cyclical	7.3%	10.1%
Communication Services	4.0%	10.5%
Real Estate	3.1%	2.0%
Utilities	3.0%	2.5%

Return for Risk

SMCP vs. BUFC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFC

BUFC Risk / Return Rank: 61
BUFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
BUFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
BUFC Omega Ratio Rank: 68
BUFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
BUFC Martin Ratio Rank: 60

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.

SMCP vs. BUFC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AlphaMark Actively Managed Small Cap ETF (SMCP) and AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SMCP	BUFC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.09	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-1.43	1.42	-2.86

Drawdowns

SMCP vs. BUFC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SMCP drawdown since its inception was -27.86%, which is greater than BUFC's maximum drawdown of -8.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SMCP and BUFC.

Drawdown Indicators

	SMCP	BUFC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.86%	-8.29%	-19.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-3.62%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-25.99%	-0.12%	-25.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.33%	-0.76%	-4.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.85%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	SMCP	BUFC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.98%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	3.36%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	43.62%	4.25%	+39.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.62%	5.64%	+37.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	43.62%	5.64%	+37.98%

SMCP vs. BUFC - Expense Ratio Comparison

SMCP has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than BUFC's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

SMCP vs. BUFC - Dividend Comparison

Neither SMCP nor BUFC has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SMCP and BUFC in my portfolio?

SMCP and BUFC have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, SMCP or BUFC?

On fees, BUFC is cheaper at 0.69% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, SMCP or BUFC?

BUFC is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for SMCP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SMCP or BUFC?

SMCP and BUFC have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between SMCP and BUFC?

SMCP is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while BUFC is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: AlphaMark Advisors and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for SMCP and 0.69% for BUFC.