XMAG vs. BUFH
XMAG (Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF) and BUFH (FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMAG is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the BITA US 500 ex Magnificent 7 Index, while BUFH is a Defined Outcome fund managed by First Trust. A 0.64 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMAG charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFH.
Performance
XMAG vs. BUFH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMAG achieves a 12.73% return, which is significantly higher than BUFH's 2.45% return.
XMAG
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 6.69%
- YTD
- 12.73%
- 6M
- 13.28%
- 1Y
- 24.62%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFH
- 1D
- -0.05%
- 1M
- 0.75%
- YTD
- 2.45%
- 6M
- 2.82%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
XMAG vs. BUFH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XMAG Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF | 12.73% | 9.12% |
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 2.45% | 3.89% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMAG and BUFH is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025 | 0.64 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
XMAG vs. BUFH — Risk / Return Rank
XMAG
BUFH
XMAG vs. BUFH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF (XMAG) and FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF (BUFH). 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.
| XMAG | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.39 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.15 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| XMAG | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.23 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.11 | 2.91 | -1.80 |
Drawdowns
XMAG vs. BUFH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMAG drawdown since its inception was -16.17%, which is greater than BUFH's maximum drawdown of -1.53%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAG and BUFH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMAG | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.17% | -1.53% | -14.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.29% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.05% | +0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.13% | -0.18% | -1.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.63% | — | — |
Volatility
XMAG vs. BUFH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMAG | BUFH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.87% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.65% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.10% | 2.37% | +8.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.12% | 2.37% | +12.75% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.12% | 2.37% | +12.75% |
XMAG vs. BUFH - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMAG has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFH's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMAG vs. BUFH - Dividend Comparison
XMAG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.46%, while BUFH has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
BUFH FT Vest Laddered Max Buffer ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
XMAG Defiance Large Cap ex-Mag 7 ETF | 0.46% | 0.51% | 0.24% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XMAG and BUFH have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, XMAG is cheaper at 0.35% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
XMAG is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFH.
XMAG has the higher dividend yield at 0.46%, compared with 0.00% for BUFH.
XMAG is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BUFH is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Defiance and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XMAG and 0.95% for BUFH.
Find the right allocation for XMAG and BUFH
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer