BUFC vs DYLG
AB Conservative Buffer ETF vs Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF
Which is better, BUFC or DYLG?
DYLG has been ahead.
DYLG has a lower expense ratio. DYLG led over 1Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BUFC | DYLG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.35%Best |
| AUM | $1.1B | $5M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 9.33% |
| Holdings | 7 | 66 |
| YTD Return | +5.05% | +7.96%Best |
| 1Y Return | +7.23% | +13.55%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +14.15% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 3.4%Best | 9.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -8.3%Best | -14.2% |
| $10,000 over 2.8 years | $12,321 | $14,063Best |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Global X by mirae Asset |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Dec 13, 2023 | Jul 25, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 13, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.8 years).
BUFC vs DYLG growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.8 years both funds cover.
BUFC vs DYLG Performance
AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and Global X Dow 30 Covered Call & Growth ETF (DYLG) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year BUFC returned +7.23% while DYLG returned +13.55%. Year to date, BUFC is up 5.05% versus a gain of 7.96% for DYLG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
DYLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 9.0% compared with 3.4% for BUFC. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -8.3% for BUFC and -14.2% for DYLG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.72. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BUFC charges 0.69% per year while DYLG charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $35 annually, a gap of $34 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BUFC currently yields 0.00% against 9.33% for DYLG.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BUFC and DYLG you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BUFC or DYLG?
BUFC has an expense ratio of 0.69% while DYLG charges 0.35%. DYLG is the cheaper option, by $34 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BUFC or DYLG?
Over the past year BUFC returned +7.23% vs +13.55% for DYLG, so DYLG leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BUFC or DYLG?
DYLG has been the more volatile fund at 9.0% annualized versus 3.4% for BUFC. Worst drawdown: BUFC -8.3% vs DYLG -14.2%.
Should I hold both BUFC and DYLG?
BUFC and DYLG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.72, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, BUFC or DYLG?
BUFC yields 0.00% while DYLG yields 9.33%, so DYLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is DYLG better than BUFC?
DYLG has a lower expense ratio. DYLG led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.