STEN vs. FBUF

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

STEN (iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF) and FBUF (Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. STEN charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for FBUF.

Performance

STEN vs. FBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF (STEN) and Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, STEN achieves a 8.04% return, which is significantly higher than FBUF's 5.54% return.

STEN

• 1D: 0.23%
• 1M: 2.98%
• YTD: 8.04%
• 6M: 8.44%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FBUF

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 2.65%
• YTD: 5.54%
• 6M: 6.41%
• 1Y: 19.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

STEN vs. FBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
STEN iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF	8.04%	2.05%
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF	5.54%	3.23%

Correlation

The correlation between STEN and FBUF is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2025	0.92

Return for Risk

STEN vs. FBUF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBUF

FBUF Risk / Return Rank: 81
FBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
FBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
FBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

STEN vs. FBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF (STEN) and Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). 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

	STEN	FBUF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	2.65	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.70	1.48	+0.23

Drawdowns

STEN vs. FBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum STEN drawdown since its inception was -6.21%, smaller than the maximum FBUF drawdown of -11.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for STEN and FBUF.

Drawdown Indicators

	STEN	FBUF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.21%	-11.09%	+4.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-5.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.07%	-0.01%	-0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.92%	-1.37%	+0.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	1.25%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	STEN	FBUF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	1.08%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	5.37%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.22%	7.48%	+1.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.22%	9.54%	-0.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.22%	9.54%	-0.32%

STEN vs. FBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

STEN has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBUF's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

STEN vs. FBUF - Dividend Comparison

STEN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.29%, less than FBUF's 0.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF	0.62%	0.64%	0.54%
STEN iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF	0.29%	0.31%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both STEN and FBUF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, STEN and FBUF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, STEN or FBUF?

On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, STEN or FBUF?

FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for STEN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, STEN or FBUF?

FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.62%, compared with 0.29% for STEN.

What is the main difference between STEN and FBUF?

They also come from different issuers: BlackRock and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for STEN and 0.48% for FBUF.