Skip to content

BUFC vs PMAR

AB Conservative Buffer ETF

BUFCBNasdaq

Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March

PMARCCboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

BUFC −0.10pt a year

BUFC0.69%PMAR0.79%

Avg volume · 30D

BUFC 2.6×the volume

BUFC49.5KPMAR19K

BUFC vs PMAR Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+5.8%BUFC+10.5%PMAR

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. BUFC +5.8%. PMAR +10.5%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%2.5%7.5%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
BUFC 0.69%, better
PMAR 0.79%
Fund size
BUFC $1.11B
PMAR $742M
1Y total return
BUFC +5.8%
PMAR +10.5%, better
Holdings
BUFC 4
PMAR 3
Avg volume (30D)
BUFC 49.5K sh, better
PMAR 19K sh
NAV per share
BUFC $43.25
PMAR $48.93
52W range

ETF.net Grade

BUFC: Cost 57, Risk 41, Mission not scored, Tradability 62, Holdings not scored, Durability 74. PMAR: Cost 35, Risk 61, Mission not scored, Tradability 48, Holdings not scored, Durability 81.
Pillar letters and Scores for BUFC, PMAR, with each pillar’s weight
PillarBUFCPMAR
Cost30% weightB57HigherD35
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightC41B61Higher
Tradability15% weightB62HigherC48
Holdings10% weightNot scoredNot scored
Durability5% weightA74A81Higher

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 PMAR 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 PMAR 16th of 51 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 15% Category.

  1. Rank 1BPSMOPacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETFScore 64
  2. Rank 2BPSMJPacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETFScore 59
  3. Rank 3BPSMRPacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETFScore 57
  4. Rank 4BBUFCAB Conservative Buffer ETFScore 55
  5. Rank 4CPOCTInnovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETFScore 55
  6. Rank 16CPFEBInnovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETFScore 47
  7. Rank 16CPMARInnovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - MarchScore 47
  8. Rank 19CGJUNFT Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - JuneScore 45

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

BUFCBAB Conservative Buffer ETF

PMARCInnovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March

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.

PMAR The March-start link in Innovator's twelve-month buffer chain: it follows the big S&P 500 ETF up to a cap and is built to absorb the first 15% of losses over each March-to-February outcome period.

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.

PMAR The Fund seeks to track the return of the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust up to a predetermined cap while protecting against the first 15% of losses during the 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.
  • PMAR The deal is written into the fund's terms: absorb SPY's first 15% of losses over an outcome period, give up gains above a cap in exchange.innovatoretfs.com
  • Fixed calendar. The outcome period runs March 1 to the end of February, then the cap resets under the same rules, so you always know when the terms change.innovatoretfs.com
  • A registered 1940 Act fund, not a bank-issued note, at a 0.79% expense ratio that lands right on the buffer-fund median.
  • Sits in the upper half of its buffer-fund peer group, one of the more solid takes on the defined-outcome playbook.

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.
  • PMAR Buy mid-period and you get whatever buffer and upside are left, not the headline 15% and the full cap. The stated terms describe a complete March-to-February run.
  • 0.79% is the going rate in this cohort and well above plain S&P 500 exposure. The options sleeve that builds the buffer is what you're paying for.
  • Trades lightly, so spreads can widen; limit orders are the usual workaround. It also makes no regular distributions, so any return shows up in the share price.

Full BUFC profile⁠

Full PMAR profile⁠

BUFC vs PMAR 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 PMAR Cost

Overpaying PMAR vs BUFC

$1,745

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

  • BUFC 0.69%

    $13,429

  • PMAR 0.79%

    $15,174

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • BUFC 0.69%
  • PMAR 0.79%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530PMAR $15,174BUFC $13,429

Year by year

YearBUFCPMAROverpaying
10$1,232$1,405$173
20$4,697$5,331$634
30$13,429$15,174$1,745

Expense ratio

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

BUFC 17th cheapest of 51 funds

PMAR 24th cheapest of 51 funds

BUFC vs PMAR Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
BUFC None
PMAR None

Distribution history

BUFCAll BUFC payments⁠

No distribution history available.

PMARAll PMAR payments⁠

No distribution history available.

BUFC vs PMAR 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 2024PMAR 5.8%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
BUFC 0.82since Jan 2024PMAR 1.52
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
BUFC −8.3%since Dec 2023PMAR −10.8%
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
BUFC 0.26PMAR 0.43

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.
  • PMARCvsPSMOB

    Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 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.
  • PMARCvsPSMJB

    Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 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.
  • PMARCvsPSMRB

    Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF - March · Pacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.79% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.