BUFC ranks 4th and GMAR 20th of 51 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 15% Category.
BUFC vs GMAR
BUFC −0.16pt a year
0.69%0.85%
BUFC 1.6×the volume
48.2K29.8K
BUFC vs GMAR Performance
+5.9%+12.5%
- BUFC 0.69%, better
- GMAR 0.85%
- BUFC $1.09B
- GMAR $421M
- BUFC +5.9%
- GMAR +12.5%, better
- BUFC 5
- GMAR 3
- BUFC 48.2K sh, better
- GMAR 29.8K sh
- BUFC $42.98
- GMAR $44.92
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | BUFC | GMAR |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | B57Higher | F13 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | C47 | A76Higher |
| Tradability | B60Higher | B57 |
| Holdings | B59 | |
| Durability | A74 | A75Higher |
Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds
Same Category. BUFC and GMAR are both graded against the same 51 S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
BUFCB
GMARC
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.
GMAR A March-dated buffer fund: it absorbs the first 15% of an SPY price drop over each one-year outcome period, and in exchange your upside stops at a cap First Trust resets every March.
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.
GMAR The Fund seeks to match the price return of the State Street® SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust up to a 14.10% cap while protecting against the first 15% of losses during the specified outcome period.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
BUFC vs GMAR 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 GMAR Cost
Overpaying GMAR vs BUFC
$2,770
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
BUFC 0.69%
$13,429
GMAR 0.85%
$16,199
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | BUFC | GMAR | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,232 | $1,508 | $276 |
| 20 | $4,697 | $5,706 | $1,009 |
| 30 | $13,429 | $16,199 | $2,770 |
- 0.69%BUFC, cheaper
- 0.85%GMAR
- Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds
- Median 0.79%
BUFC 17th cheapest of 51 funds
GMAR 37th cheapest of 51 funds
BUFC vs GMAR Dividends
- BUFC None
- GMAR None
Distribution history
BUFC vs GMAR Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- BUFC 3.4%GMAR 4.8%
- Return per unit of risk
- BUFC 0.82GMAR 1.64
- Worst fall
- BUFC −8.3%GMAR −9.1%
- Market sensitivity
- BUFC 0.26GMAR 0.34
Popular comparisons
- 0.69% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.85% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.85% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.85% · 0.49%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.