XIMR vs. BUFC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

XIMR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer & Premium Income ETF - March) and BUFC (AB Conservative Buffer ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, XIMR returned 7.87% vs 7.90% for BUFC. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XIMR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for BUFC.

Performance

XIMR vs. BUFC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer & Premium Income ETF - March (XIMR) 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, XIMR achieves a 4.15% return, which is significantly higher than BUFC's 2.49% return.

XIMR

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 4.15%
• 6M: 4.33%
• 1Y: 7.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BUFC

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: -0.36%
• YTD: 2.49%
• 6M: 2.43%
• 1Y: 7.90%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XIMR vs. BUFC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
XIMR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer & Premium Income ETF - March	4.15%	6.80%	5.75%
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	2.49%	5.50%	7.97%

Correlation

The correlation between XIMR and BUFC is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 19, 2024	0.59

The correlation between XIMR and BUFC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

XIMR vs. BUFC — Risk / Return Rank

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

XIMR

XIMR Risk / Return Rank: 97
XIMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
XIMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
XIMR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
XIMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
XIMR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

BUFC

BUFC Risk / Return Rank: 57
BUFC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
BUFC Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
BUFC Omega Ratio Rank: 63
BUFC Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
BUFC Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

XIMR vs. BUFC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer & Premium Income ETF - March (XIMR) 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.

	XIMR	BUFC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.87	1.82	+2.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.00	2.55	+4.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.20	1.35	+0.86
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.29	2.19	+5.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	59.00	9.27	+49.74

XIMR vs. BUFC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XIMR Sharpe Ratio is 3.87, which is higher than the BUFC Sharpe Ratio of 1.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XIMR and BUFC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XIMR vs. BUFC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XIMR drawdown since its inception was -5.12%, smaller than the maximum BUFC drawdown of -8.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XIMR and BUFC.

Drawdown Indicators

	XIMR	BUFC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.12%	-8.29%	+3.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.08%	-3.62%	+2.54%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-0.55%	+0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.17%	-0.75%	+0.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.13%	0.85%	-0.72%

Volatility

XIMR vs. BUFC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer & Premium Income ETF - March (XIMR) is 0.79%, while AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) has a volatility of 1.62%. This indicates that XIMR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XIMR	BUFC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.79%	1.62%	-0.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.79%	3.54%	-1.75%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.08%	4.36%	-2.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.34%	5.64%	-1.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.34%	5.64%	-1.30%

XIMR vs. BUFC - Expense Ratio Comparison

XIMR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than BUFC's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

XIMR vs. BUFC - Dividend Comparison

XIMR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.43%, while BUFC has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BUFC AB Conservative Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XIMR FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer & Premium Income ETF - March	6.43%	6.41%	4.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XIMR and BUFC in my portfolio?

XIMR and BUFC have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XIMR or BUFC?

BUFC has higher volatility (1.62%) compared to XIMR (0.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XIMR dropped -5.12% vs BUFC's -8.29%.

Which ETF is better, XIMR or BUFC?

On 1-year performance, BUFC leads with 7.90% vs 7.87% for XIMR. On fees, BUFC is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, XIMR has been the lower-risk option at 0.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XIMR or BUFC?

Over the 1-year period, BUFC has performed better with a 7.90% return vs 7.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XIMR or BUFC?

BUFC is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for XIMR.

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

XIMR has the higher dividend yield at 6.43%, compared with 0.00% for BUFC.

What is the main difference between XIMR and BUFC?

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and AllianceBernstein. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for XIMR and 0.69% for BUFC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XIMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.87 vs 1.82), 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.