BUFM vs FTLS

BUFM vs FTLS

Which is better, BUFM or FTLS?

FTLS has been ahead.

BUFM has a lower expense ratio. FTLS led over 1Y and the full window.

Lower Fees: BUFMHigher Returns: FTLS

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

MetricBUFMFTLS
Expense Ratio0.69%Best1.38%
AUM$492M$2.7B
Dividend Yield0.00%0.87%
Holdings7363
YTD Return+4.67%+9.83%Best
1Y Return+7.70%+13.43%Best
3Y Return (annualized)-+14.42%
5Y Return (annualized)-+10.59%
Volatility (annualized)5.3%Best6.4%
Max Drawdown-9.4%Best-11.7%
$10,000 over 1.8 years$11,674$11,817Best
Fund FamilyAllianceBernstein L.P.First Trust Portfolios (US)
CategoryAlternativeAlternative
StyleMulti AlternativeMulti Alternative
InceptionDec 9, 2024Sep 8, 2014

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 10, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.8 years).

BUFM vs FTLS 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 1.8 years both funds cover.

Compare BUFM against instead:BUFM vs SPYBUFM vs QQQBUFM vs VOOBUFM vs VTIFTLS against:FTLS vs VXUS

BUFM vs FTLS Performance

AB Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFM) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF (FTLS) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year BUFM returned +7.70% while FTLS returned +13.43%. Year to date, BUFM is up 4.67% versus a gain of 9.83% for FTLS.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

FTLS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 6.4% compared with 5.3% for BUFM. 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 -9.4% for BUFM and -11.7% for FTLS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.77. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.

Fees and Cost Over Time

BUFM charges 0.69% per year while FTLS charges 1.38%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $138 annually, a gap of $69 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BUFM currently yields 0.00% against 0.87% for FTLS.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of BUFM and FTLS you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

BUFMFTLS

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, BUFM or FTLS?

BUFM has an expense ratio of 0.69% while FTLS charges 1.38%. BUFM is the cheaper option, by $69 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, BUFM or FTLS?

Over the past year BUFM returned +7.70% vs +13.43% for FTLS, so FTLS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), BUFM annualized +8.98% vs +9.72% for FTLS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, BUFM or FTLS?

FTLS has been the more volatile fund at 6.4% annualized versus 5.3% for BUFM. Worst drawdown: BUFM -9.4% vs FTLS -11.7%.

Should I hold both BUFM and FTLS?

BUFM and FTLS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.77, 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 FTLS?

BUFM yields 0.00% while FTLS yields 0.87%, so FTLS currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is FTLS better than BUFM?

BUFM has a lower expense ratio. FTLS 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.