XMAR vs. BUFD
XMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March) and BUFD (FT Vest Laddered Deep Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XMAR is a Options Trading fund actively managed by FT Vest, while BUFD is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by FT Vest. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XMAR returned 11.18%/yr vs 12.12%/yr for BUFD. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XMAR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BUFD.
Performance
XMAR vs. BUFD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XMAR achieves a 6.66% return, which is significantly higher than BUFD's 5.17% return.
XMAR
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 1.13%
- YTD
- 6.66%
- 6M
- 7.46%
- 1Y
- 13.17%
- 3Y*
- 11.18%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BUFD
- 1D
- -0.07%
- 1M
- 1.78%
- YTD
- 5.17%
- 6M
- 5.92%
- 1Y
- 14.85%
- 3Y*
- 12.12%
- 5Y*
- 7.68%
- 10Y*
- —
XMAR vs. BUFD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
XMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March | 6.66% | 10.30% | 10.10% | 10.30% |
BUFD FT Vest Laddered Deep Buffer ETF | 5.17% | 10.66% | 12.42% | 13.90% |
Correlation
The correlation between XMAR and BUFD is 0.80, 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 | 0.80 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 21, 2023 | 0.78 |
The correlation between XMAR and BUFD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.
XMAR vs. BUFD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
XMAR
BUFD
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Industrials
Consumer Defensive
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Technology
XMAR
BUFD
Financial Services
XMAR
BUFD
Communication Services
XMAR
BUFD
Consumer Cyclical
XMAR
BUFD
Healthcare
XMAR
BUFD
Industrials
XMAR
BUFD
Consumer Defensive
XMAR
BUFD
Energy
XMAR
BUFD
Utilities
XMAR
BUFD
Real Estate
XMAR
BUFD
Basic Materials
XMAR
BUFD
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
XMAR vs. BUFD — Risk / Return Rank
XMAR
BUFD
XMAR vs. BUFD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) and FT Vest Laddered Deep Buffer ETF (BUFD). 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.
| XMAR | BUFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 4.40 | 2.87 | +1.53 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 7.61 | 4.44 | +3.17 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.22 | 1.60 | +0.63 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.04 | 4.46 | +4.58 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 69.02 | 24.34 | +44.68 |
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
| XMAR | BUFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.40 | 2.87 | +1.53 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 1.00 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.13 | 1.00 | +1.13 |
Drawdowns
XMAR vs. BUFD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XMAR drawdown since its inception was -7.29%, smaller than the maximum BUFD drawdown of -10.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XMAR and BUFD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XMAR | BUFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.29% | -10.75% | +3.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.48% | -3.43% | +1.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -7.29% | -10.15% | +2.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -10.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.15% | -0.07% | -0.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.30% | -1.97% | +1.67% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.19% | 0.63% | -0.44% |
Volatility
XMAR vs. BUFD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) is 0.66%, while FT Vest Laddered Deep Buffer ETF (BUFD) has a volatility of 0.78%. This indicates that XMAR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BUFD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XMAR | BUFD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.66% | 0.78% | -0.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.40% | 3.94% | -1.54% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.01% | 5.20% | -2.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.56% | 7.73% | -2.17% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.56% | 7.55% | -1.99% |
XMAR vs. BUFD - Expense Ratio Comparison
XMAR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than BUFD's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
XMAR vs. BUFD - Dividend Comparison
Neither XMAR nor BUFD has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
XMAR and BUFD have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BUFD has higher volatility (0.78%) compared to XMAR (0.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XMAR dropped -7.29% vs BUFD's -10.75%.
On 3-year performance, BUFD leads with 12.12% vs 11.18% for XMAR. On fees, XMAR is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, XMAR has been the lower-risk option at 0.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, BUFD has performed better with a 12.12% return vs 11.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XMAR is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BUFD.
XMAR and BUFD have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
XMAR is categorized as Options Trading, while BUFD is Defined Outcome. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for XMAR and 0.95% for BUFD.
XMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.40 vs 2.87), 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.
Find the right allocation for XMAR and BUFD
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