PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
XLG vs. BUFP
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

XLG vs. BUFP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

XLG vs. BUFP - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
-7.82%19.51%10.31%
BUFP
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF
-1.34%12.92%6.36%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLG achieves a -7.82% return, which is significantly lower than BUFP's -1.34% return.


XLG

1D
3.26%
1M
-4.33%
YTD
-7.82%
6M
-4.84%
1Y
19.36%
3Y*
21.64%
5Y*
13.80%
10Y*
15.64%

BUFP

1D
1.96%
1M
-2.04%
YTD
-1.34%
6M
1.19%
1Y
13.58%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


XLG vs. BUFP - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLG has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFP's 0.50% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

XLG vs. BUFP — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLG
XLG Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 6363
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
Martin Ratio Rank

BUFP
BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6767
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

XLG vs. BUFP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) 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.


XLGBUFPDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.97

1.23

-0.25

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.52

1.86

-0.34

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.22

1.31

-0.09

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.60

1.71

-0.11

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

5.67

9.81

-4.14

XLG vs. BUFP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLG Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is comparable to the BUFP Sharpe Ratio of 1.23. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLG and BUFP, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


XLGBUFPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.97

1.23

-0.25

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.74

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.83

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.58

1.02

-0.44

Correlation

The correlation between XLG and BUFP is 0.88, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

XLG vs. BUFP - Dividend Comparison

XLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.70%, more than BUFP's 0.01% yield.


TTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
XLG
Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF
0.70%0.64%0.72%0.97%1.34%0.94%1.25%1.58%2.00%1.85%2.00%2.09%
BUFP
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF
0.01%0.01%0.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

XLG vs. BUFP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLG drawdown since its inception was -52.39%, which is greater than BUFP's maximum drawdown of -11.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLG and BUFP.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


XLGBUFPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-52.39%

-11.98%

-40.41%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.41%

-8.16%

-4.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.02%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-30.46%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-9.56%

-2.54%

-7.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.69%

-1.08%

-6.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.49%

1.42%

+2.07%

Volatility

XLG vs. BUFP - Volatility Comparison

Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) has a higher volatility of 5.76% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) at 3.41%. This indicates that XLG'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.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


XLGBUFPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.76%

3.41%

+2.35%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.64%

4.99%

+5.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.97%

11.11%

+8.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.69%

9.79%

+8.90%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.81%

9.79%

+9.02%