SNOV vs. BUFP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SNOV (FT Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - November) and BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. SNOV is actively managed, while BUFP is passively managed. Over the past year, SNOV returned 17.37% vs 17.24% for BUFP. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SNOV charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for BUFP.

Performance

SNOV vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - November (SNOV) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SNOV achieves a 7.65% return, which is significantly higher than BUFP's 6.23% return.

SNOV

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 1.60%
• YTD: 7.65%
• 6M: 7.78%
• 1Y: 17.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFP

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 2.04%
• YTD: 6.23%
• 6M: 7.00%
• 1Y: 17.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SNOV vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SNOV FT Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - November	7.65%	7.01%	6.11%
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	6.23%	12.92%	6.36%

Correlation

The correlation between SNOV and BUFP is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024	0.73

The correlation between SNOV and BUFP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

SNOV vs. BUFP - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SNOV	BUFP
Industrials	17.5%	8.1%
Technology	16.9%	36.2%
Healthcare	16.5%	8.4%
Financial Services	15.9%	11.9%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	10.1%
Real Estate	6.2%	1.9%
Energy	6.2%	3.5%
Basic Materials	4.8%	1.8%
Utilities	2.9%	2.3%
Communication Services	2.5%	10.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.4%	4.9%

Return for Risk

SNOV vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank

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

SNOV

SNOV Risk / Return Rank: 49
SNOV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
SNOV Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
SNOV Omega Ratio Rank: 48
SNOV Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
SNOV Martin Ratio Rank: 56

BUFP

BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 86
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 89
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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.

SNOV vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - November (SNOV) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). 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.

	SNOV	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	2.77	-1.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.34	4.12	-1.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.58	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.20	3.93	-1.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.48	21.96	-12.48
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SNOV vs. BUFP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SNOV Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is lower than the BUFP Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SNOV and BUFP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SNOV	BUFP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.60	2.77	-1.16
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.07	1.40	-0.33

Drawdowns

SNOV vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SNOV drawdown since its inception was -15.36%, which is greater than BUFP's maximum drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SNOV and BUFP.

Drawdown Indicators

	SNOV	BUFP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.36%	-11.98%	-3.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.91%	-4.41%	-3.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-0.22%	-0.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.03%	-1.00%	-1.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.84%	0.79%	+1.05%

Volatility

SNOV vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - November (SNOV) has a higher volatility of 1.69% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) at 0.95%. This indicates that SNOV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BUFP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SNOV	BUFP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.69%	0.95%	+0.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.08%	4.82%	+1.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.90%	6.27%	+4.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.14%	9.49%	+1.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.14%	9.49%	+1.65%

SNOV vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison

SNOV has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than BUFP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

SNOV vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison

SNOV has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%
SNOV FT Vest U.S. Small Cap Moderate Buffer ETF - November	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SNOV and BUFP in my portfolio?

SNOV and BUFP have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SNOV or BUFP?

SNOV has higher volatility (1.69%) compared to BUFP (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SNOV dropped -15.36% vs BUFP's -11.98%.

Which ETF is better, SNOV or BUFP?

On 1-year performance, SNOV leads with 17.37% vs 17.24% for BUFP. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BUFP has been the lower-risk option at 0.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SNOV or BUFP?

Over the 1-year period, SNOV has performed better with a 17.37% return vs 17.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SNOV or BUFP?

BUFP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for SNOV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SNOV or BUFP?

BUFP has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for SNOV.

What is the main difference between SNOV and BUFP?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for SNOV and 0.50% for BUFP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.77 vs 1.60), 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.