Skip to content

BUFC vs GAPR

AB Conservative Buffer ETF

BUFCBNasdaq

FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - April

GAPRCCboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

BUFC −0.16pt a year

BUFC0.69%GAPR0.85%

Avg volume · 30D

BUFC 7.4×the volume

BUFC48.2KGAPR6.56K

BUFC vs GAPR Performance

Nov 7, 2025 – Nov 9, 2026

+5.9%BUFC+7.8%GAPR

Nov 7, 2025 to Nov 9, 2026. BUFC +5.9%. GAPR +7.8%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−2%0%2%4%Nov 2025May 2026Nov 2026
Expense ratio
BUFC 0.69%, better
GAPR 0.85%
Fund size
BUFC $1.09B
GAPR $290M
1Y total return
BUFC +5.9%
GAPR +7.8%, better
Holdings
BUFC 5
GAPR 3
Avg volume (30D)
BUFC 48.2K sh, better
GAPR 6.56K sh
NAV per share
BUFC $42.98
GAPR $41.97
52W range

ETF.net Grade

BUFC: Cost 57, Risk 47, Mission not scored, Tradability 60, Holdings not scored, Durability 74. GAPR: Cost 13, Risk 63, Mission not scored, Tradability 58, Holdings 62, Durability 70.
Pillar letters and Scores for BUFC, GAPR, with each pillar’s weight
PillarBUFCGAPR
Cost30% weightB57HigherF13
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightC47B63Higher
Tradability15% weightB60HigherB58
Holdings10% weightNot scoredB62
Durability5% weightA74HigherA70

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. BUFC and GAPR are both graded against the same 51 S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

S&P 500 Buffer 15%⁠

Category · 51 funds
See all 51 ›

BUFC ranks 4th and GAPR 27th of 51 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 15% Category.

  1. Rank 1BPSMOPacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETFScore 63
  2. Rank 2BPSMJPacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETFScore 60
  3. Rank 3BPSMRPacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETFScore 57
  4. Rank 4BBUFCAB Conservative Buffer ETFScore 56
  5. Rank 5BPSEPInnovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETFScore 55
  6. Rank 24CGOCTFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - OctoberScore 43
  7. Rank 27CGAPRFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - AprilScore 42
  8. Rank 27CGAUGFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - AugustScore 42

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

BUFCBAB Conservative Buffer ETF

GAPRCFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - April

In short

BUFC Most buffer funds lock you into a 12-month outcome period. BUFC resets every three months, targeting 15% downside protection against the S&P 500 with roughly 3% of the upside per period. Deep cushion, short leash.

GAPR The April door on First Trust's monthly buffer ladder: it aims to absorb the first 15% of a one-year drop in the S&P 500's price and gives up gains above a cap set each April. Same recipe as its sibling months, different start date.

Stated mandate

BUFC The Fund is an actively managed equity ETF seeking conservative capital appreciation with potential partial downside protection. It uses options to establish an upside cap and downside protection over rolling three-month periods, targeting 15% downside protection and about 3% upside participation to the S&P 500.

GAPR The Fund seeks to match the price return of the State Street® SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust up to a set cap while protecting the first 15% of losses during the April 20, 2026–April 16, 2027 outcome period.

Why people hold it

  • BUFC Uses options to target 15% downside protection against the S&P 500 over rolling three-month periods, so the cushion resets four times a year instead of once.alliancebernstein.com
  • At 0.69%, it costs less than Innovator's 0.79% Power Buffer funds (PJUL, PJAN, POCT) and less than the typical fund in its buffer cohort.
  • Actively managed rather than pinned to a calendar index series, running since 2023, and among the stronger implementations in its buffer peer group.
  • GAPR Terms are contractual, not discretionary: the first 15% of losses absorbed, upside capped, over a defined April-to-April window whose cap is published before the period starts.ftportfolios.com
  • Twelve monthly siblings exist (GMAY, GJUN, GSEP and the rest), so you can choose an entry month or ladder across several rather than leaning on one 12-month window.
  • The yardstick is the price return of the largest S&P 500 ETF, so the payoff is measured against something you can watch tick by tick instead of a bespoke index.

Worth knowing

  • BUFC The price of that deep cushion: upside participation is targeted near 3% per three-month period, so big rallies mostly pass you by.
  • Protection is partial and period-based. Losses past the targeted 15% pass through, and buying mid-period shifts your effective buffer and cap.alliancebernstein.com
  • Thinly traded for its size, so spreads and limit orders deserve attention.
  • GAPR At 0.85% a year it sits at the pricier end of the buffer shelf; BUFF, a laddered rival in the same group, charges 0.10%.
  • Buy mid-period and the math shifts: the full 15% cushion and the stated cap apply to holders who own it from one April reset to the next.
  • Thinly traded next to the category's giants, and it follows price return only, so S&P 500 dividends and regular income are not part of the design.

Full BUFC profile⁠

Full GAPR profile⁠

BUFC vs GAPR Holdings

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

BUFC vs GAPR Cost

Overpaying GAPR vs BUFC

$2,770

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • BUFC 0.69%

    $13,429

  • GAPR 0.85%

    $16,199

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • BUFC 0.69%
  • GAPR 0.85%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530GAPR $16,199BUFC $13,429

Year by year

YearBUFCGAPROverpaying
10$1,232$1,508$276
20$4,697$5,706$1,009
30$13,429$16,199$2,770

Expense ratio

  • 0.69%BUFC, cheaper
  • 0.85%GAPR
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds
  • Median 0.79%

BUFC 17th cheapest of 51 funds

GAPR 37th cheapest of 51 funds

BUFC vs GAPR Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 9, 2026
Payout (12M)
BUFC None
GAPR None

Distribution history

BUFCAll BUFC payments⁠

No distribution history available.

GAPRAll GAPR payments⁠

No distribution history available.

BUFC vs GAPR Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
BUFC 3.4%since Jan 2024GAPR 4.4%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
BUFC 0.82since Jan 2024GAPR 1.59
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
BUFC −8.3%since Dec 2023GAPR −9.0%since Apr 2023
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
BUFC 0.26GAPR 0.29

Popular comparisons

  • BUFCBvsPSMOB

    AB Conservative Buffer ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GAPRCvsPSMOB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - April · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • BUFCBvsPSMJB

    AB Conservative Buffer ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GAPRCvsPSMJB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - April · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • BUFCBvsPSMRB

    AB Conservative Buffer ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • GAPRCvsPSMRB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - April · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.