XCHG vs. BUFC

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

XCHG (AB US Equity ETF) and BUFC (AB Conservative Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XCHG is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by AllianceBernstein, while BUFC is a Options Trading fund actively managed by AllianceBernstein. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XCHG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for BUFC.

Performance

XCHG vs. BUFC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AB US Equity ETF (XCHG) and AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCHG achieves a 8.47% return, which is significantly higher than BUFC's 3.42% return.

XCHG

• 1D: 0.70%
• 1M: 3.47%
• 6M: 6.06%
• YTD: 8.47%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFC

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: 0.88%
• 6M: 2.86%
• YTD: 3.42%
• 1Y: 7.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XCHG vs. BUFC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XCHG AB US Equity ETF	8.47%	0.38%
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	3.42%	0.37%

Correlation

The correlation between XCHG and BUFC is 0.81, 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 Dec 15, 2025	0.81

Return for Risk

XCHG vs. BUFC — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCHG

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

BUFC

BUFC Risk / Return Rank: 66
BUFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
BUFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
BUFC Omega Ratio Rank: 74
BUFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
BUFC Martin Ratio Rank: 64

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.

XCHG vs. BUFC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB US Equity ETF (XCHG) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	XCHG	BUFC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.81	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.53	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.35	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.17	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	9.16	—

Drawdowns

XCHG vs. BUFC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCHG drawdown since its inception was -9.66%, which is greater than BUFC's maximum drawdown of -8.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCHG and BUFC.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCHG	BUFC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.66%	-8.29%	-1.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-3.62%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.84%	-0.74%	-1.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.86%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	XCHG	BUFC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	1.25%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	3.54%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.16%	4.35%	+8.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.16%	5.60%	+7.56%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.16%	5.60%	+7.56%

XCHG vs. BUFC - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCHG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFC's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

XCHG vs. BUFC - Dividend Comparison

XCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, while BUFC has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%
XCHG AB US Equity ETF	0.37%	0.05%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XCHG and BUFC in my portfolio?

XCHG and BUFC have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, XCHG or BUFC?

On fees, XCHG is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCHG or BUFC?

XCHG is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for BUFC.

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

XCHG has the higher dividend yield at 0.37%, compared with 0.00% for BUFC.

What is the main difference between XCHG and BUFC?

XCHG is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFC is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for XCHG and 0.69% for BUFC.