BUFM vs TUG
AB Moderate Buffer ETF vs STF Tactical Growth ETF
Which is better, BUFM or TUG?
TUG has been ahead.
TUG has a lower expense ratio. TUG 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 | TUG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.65%Best |
| AUM | $492M | $35M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.88% |
| Holdings | 7 | 204 |
| YTD Return | +4.67% | +19.37%Best |
| 1Y Return | +7.70% | +22.88%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.50% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.3%Best | 18.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -9.4%Best | -22.3% |
| $10,000 over 1.8 years | $11,674 | $14,014Best |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Shelton Capital Management |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Dec 9, 2024 | May 18, 2022 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized), 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 TUG 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.
BUFM vs TUG Performance
AB Moderate Buffer ETF (BUFM) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG) is an ETF from Shelton Capital Management. Over the past year BUFM returned +7.70% while TUG returned +22.88%. Year to date, BUFM is up 4.67% versus a gain of 19.37% for TUG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TUG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.4% 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 -22.3% for TUG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.81. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BUFM charges 0.69% per year while TUG charges 0.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $65 annually, a gap of $4 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BUFM currently yields 0.00% against 1.88% for TUG.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BUFM and TUG 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 TUG?
BUFM has an expense ratio of 0.69% while TUG charges 0.65%. TUG is the cheaper option, by $4 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BUFM or TUG?
Over the past year BUFM returned +7.70% vs +22.88% for TUG, so TUG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), BUFM annualized +8.98% vs +20.62% for TUG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BUFM or TUG?
TUG has been the more volatile fund at 18.4% annualized versus 5.3% for BUFM. Worst drawdown: BUFM -9.4% vs TUG -22.3%.
Should I hold both BUFM and TUG?
BUFM and TUG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.81, 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 TUG?
BUFM yields 0.00% while TUG yields 1.88%, so TUG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TUG better than BUFM?
TUG has a lower expense ratio. TUG 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.