Skip to content
etf.net

BUFC vs SQBA

AB Conservative Buffer ETF

BUFCBNasdaq

FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly 15 Buffer ETF

SQBA—Cboe

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

BUFC −0.16pt a year

BUFC0.69%SQBA0.85%

Avg volume · 30D

BUFC 19.2×the volume

BUFC48.2KSQBA2.52K

BUFC vs SQBA Performance

Oct 6, 2026 – Nov 6, 2026

−1.5%BUFC−1.3%SQBA

Oct 6, 2026 to Nov 6, 2026. BUFC −1.5%. SQBA −1.3%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.−1%−0.75%−0.5%−0.25%0%Oct 6Oct 21Nov 6
Expense ratio
BUFC 0.69%, better
SQBA 0.85%
Fund size
BUFC $1.09B
SQBA $5M
1Y total return
BUFC +5.3%
SQBA No data
Holdings
BUFC 5
SQBA 3
Avg volume (30D)
BUFC 48.2K sh, better
SQBA 2.52K sh
NAV per share
BUFC $42.98
SQBA $30.53
52W range

ETF.net Grade

  • —SQBANot yet graded
BUFC: Cost 57, Risk 47, Mission not scored, Tradability 60, Holdings not scored, Durability 74.
Pillar letters and Scores for BUFC, SQBA, with each pillar’s weight
PillarBUFCSQBA
Cost30% weightB57Not scored
Mission25% weightNot scoredNot scored
Risk15% weightC47Not scored
Tradability15% weightB60Not scored
Holdings10% weightNot scoredNot scored
Durability5% weightA74Not scored

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds

How we build Categories ›

S&P 500 Buffer 15%⁠

Category · 51 funds
See all 51 ›

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

  1. Rank 1BPSMOPacer Swan SOS Moderate (October) ETFScore 65
  2. Rank 2BPSMJPacer Swan SOS Moderate (July) ETFScore 60
  3. Rank 3BPSMRPacer Swan SOS Moderate (April) ETFScore 58
  4. Rank 4BBUFCAB Conservative Buffer ETFScore 56
  5. Rank 5CPSEPInnovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETFScore 55
  6. SQBANot yet graded

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

BUFCBAB Conservative Buffer ETF

SQBA—FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly 15 Buffer ETF

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.

SQBA No data

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.

SQBA No data

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.

SQBA No data

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.

SQBA No data

Full BUFC profile⁠

Full SQBA profile⁠

BUFC vs SQBA Holdings

How BUFC and SQBA differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

About this figure: SQBA holds other funds. We compare those funds, not the stocks inside them.

Level by level

  • Holdings0 in both0.0%
  • Sector11 Sectors99.1%
  • Countryby domicile99.99%

Sector

Sector weights in BUFC and SQBA, widest gap first
SectorMore in BUFCMore in SQBAGap
TechnologyBUFC +1.0 points
Health CareSQBA +0.3 points
Consumer StaplesSQBA +0.2 points
EnergySQBA +0.1 points
FinancialsSQBA +0.1 points
Consumer DiscretionarySQBA +0.1 points
CommunicationSame weight
UtilitiesSQBA +0.1 points
Real EstateSame weight
MaterialsSame weight
IndustrialsSame weight

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in BUFC and SQBA, widest gap first
CountryMore in BUFCMore in SQBAGap
United StatesSame weight
SwitzerlandSame weight
ChinaSame weight
MexicoSame weight
IrelandSame weight
United KingdomSame weight

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

  • BUFC100.5%
  • SQBA100.2%

Securities held

  • BUFC3
  • SQBA2

Asset class

BUFC
Alternatives
SQBA
Multi-Asset

Holdings

  • Only in BUFC3
  • In both0
  • Only in SQBA2

Only in BUFC

3 securities, 100% of BUFC by weight

  • 4SPY 11/30/26 C3.86 4SPY 11/30/26 C3.8694.89%
  • 4SPY 11/30/26 P772.49 4SPY 11/30/26 P772.495.12%
  • Alliancebernstein Govt Stif Ssc Fund 64BA Agis 5870.24%

Only in SQBA

2 securities, 99.3% of SQBA by weight

  • 2026-11-20 State Street® SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust C 7.6595.33%
  • 2026-11-20 State Street® SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust P 765.713.97%

Weight gaps

BUFC and SQBA share no securities.

All 7 BUFC holdings⁠All 4 SQBA 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 SQBA Cost

Overpaying SQBA vs BUFC

$2,770

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

  • BUFC 0.69%

    $13,429

  • SQBA 0.85%

    $16,199

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • BUFC 0.69%
  • SQBA 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$20K051015202530SQBA $16,199BUFC $13,429

Year by year

YearBUFCSQBAOverpaying
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%SQBA
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 15% funds
  • Median 0.79%

BUFC 17th cheapest of 51 funds

SQBA 37th cheapest of 51 funds

BUFC vs SQBA Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 6, 2026
Payout (12M)
BUFC None
SQBA None

Distribution history

BUFCAll BUFC payments⁠

No distribution history available.

SQBAAll SQBA payments⁠

No distribution history available.

BUFC vs SQBA 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 2024SQBA No data
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
BUFC 0.82since Jan 2024SQBA No data
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
BUFC −8.3%since Dec 2023SQBA No data
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
BUFC 0.26SQBA 0.00

BUFC and SQBA in the news

All news⁠

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.

  • SQBA—vsPSMOB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly 15 Buffer ETF · 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.

  • SQBA—vsPSMJB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly 15 Buffer ETF · 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.

  • SQBA—vsPSMRB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly 15 Buffer ETF · 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.