BUFM vs FEBM
AB Moderate Buffer ETF vs FT Vest US Equity Max Buffer ETF - February
Which is better, BUFM or FEBM?
BUFM has been ahead.
BUFM has a lower expense ratio. BUFM 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 | BUFM | FEBM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69%Best | 0.85% |
| AUM | $492M | $46M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 7 | 10 |
| YTD Return | +4.67%Best | +4.57% |
| 1Y Return | +7.70%Best | +6.24% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.4% | 2.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -8.0% | -2.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.6 years | $11,664Best | $11,009 |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Dec 9, 2024 | Feb 21, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 24, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.6 years).
BUFM vs FEBM 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 1.6 years both funds cover.
BUFM vs FEBM Performance
AB Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFM) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and FT Vest US Equity Max Buffer ETF - February (FEBM) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year BUFM returned +7.70% while FEBM returned +6.24%. Year to date, BUFM is up 4.67% versus a gain of 4.57% for FEBM.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BUFM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 5.4% compared with 2.4% for FEBM. 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 -8.0% for BUFM and -2.6% for FEBM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BUFM charges 0.69% per year while FEBM charges 0.85%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $85 annually, a gap of $16 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BUFM currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for FEBM.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BUFM and FEBM 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, BUFM or FEBM?
BUFM has an expense ratio of 0.69% while FEBM charges 0.85%. BUFM is the cheaper option, by $16 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BUFM or FEBM?
Over the past year BUFM returned +7.70% vs +6.24% for FEBM, so BUFM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), BUFM annualized +10.10% vs +6.19% for FEBM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BUFM or FEBM?
BUFM has been the more volatile fund at 5.4% annualized versus 2.4% for FEBM. Worst drawdown: BUFM -8.0% vs FEBM -2.6%.
Should I hold both BUFM and FEBM?
BUFM and FEBM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, 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, BUFM or FEBM?
BUFM yields 0.00% while FEBM yields 0.00%, so FEBM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is FEBM better than BUFM?
BUFM has a lower expense ratio. BUFM 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.