Skip to content

FFEB vs ZALT

FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February

FFEBCCboe

Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

ZALTACboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

ZALT −0.16pt a year

FFEB0.85%ZALT0.69%

Avg volume · 30D

ZALT 6.0×the volume

FFEB22.9KZALT138K

3Y return · a year

FFEB +7.1pt

FFEB+17.7%ZALT+10.6%

FFEB vs ZALT Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+12.3%FFEB+7.1%ZALT

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. FFEB +12.3%. ZALT +7.1%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%2.5%5%10%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
FFEB 0.85%
ZALT 0.69%, better
Fund size
FFEB $1.38B
ZALT $840M
1Y total return
FFEB +12.3%, better
ZALT +7.1%
Holdings
FFEB 3
ZALT 503
Avg volume (30D)
FFEB 22.9K sh
ZALT 138K sh, better
NAV per share
FFEB $62.47
ZALT $34.50
52W range

ETF.net Grade

FFEB: Cost 11, Risk 67, Mission not scored, Tradability 89, Holdings 63, Durability 87. ZALT: Cost 82, Risk 79, Mission 80, Tradability 65, Holdings 90, Durability 61.
Pillar letters and Scores for FFEB, ZALT, with each pillar’s weight
PillarFFEBZALT
Cost30% weightF11A82Higher
Mission25% weightNot scoredA80
Risk15% weightB67A79Higher
Tradability15% weightA89HigherB65
Holdings10% weightB63A90Higher
Durability5% weightA87HigherB61

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds

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

Same Category. FFEB and ZALT are both graded against the same 77 S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

S&P 500 Buffer 9-12%⁠

Category · 77 funds
See all 77 ›

ZALT ranks 1st and FFEB 41st of 77 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% Category.

  1. Rank 1AZALTInnovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - QuarterlyScore 77
  2. Rank 2BAUGPPGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - AugustScore 67
  3. Rank 40CBNOVInnovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETFScore 50
  4. Rank 41CFFEBFT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - FebruaryScore 49
  5. Rank 42CBDECInnovator U.S. Equity Buffer ETFScore 47

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

FFEBCFT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February

ZALTAInnovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly

In short

FFEB The February door into First Trust's buffer lineup: it absorbs the first 10% of a year's decline in the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust, and caps the upside in exchange. Same recipe, reset every February since 2020.

ZALT The defined-outcome trade on a three-month clock: ZALT follows SPY up to a cap and buffers the first 10% of a decline, then resets both every quarter. Four fresh caps a year, at a fee under the shallow-buffer median.

Stated mandate

FFEB The Fund seeks to match the price return of the State Street® SPDR® S&P 500® ETF Trust before fees and expenses, subject to a 15.01% upside cap and a 10% downside buffer over the current target-outcome period.

ZALT The fund seeks to follow SPY's return up to a predetermined cap while providing a 10% downside buffer over each three-month outcome period. It may be held indefinitely, with the defined outcomes resetting at the end of each period.

Why people hold it

  • FFEB Absorbs the first 10% of the reference S&P 500 ETF's price decline over each 12-month period, with a cap set at the February reset. Price return only, so dividends aren't included.ftportfolios.com
  • Running since February 2020, and First Trust fields a version for every calendar month, so you can start in any month or ladder several across the year.
  • The reference asset is the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust itself, not a bespoke index, and this is a multi-billion-dollar fund.
  • ZALT Resets on a quarterly clock: a new cap is set the first day of each calendar quarter and the 10% buffer starts over. Can be held indefinitely, no rolling into a new ticker.sec.govcboe.com
  • At 0.69% it undercuts the going rate for 10% buffer funds on the S&P 500, where peers like SIXZ, JULT and BJUN charge 0.74% to 0.79%.
  • The cushion is built from FLEX options on SPY itself, so the thing you are hedged against is the same fund most investors already watch.sec.gov
  • Sits among the stronger implementations in its shallow-buffer peer group on cost and ease of trading.

Worth knowing

  • FFEB The 0.85% fee sits above the buffer-fund median, and cheaper builds exist in the group (BUFB charges 0.10%).
  • The cap resets each February and isn't known in advance. Buy mid-period and you inherit the remaining buffer and cap, not the headline terms.ftportfolios.com
  • It trades lightly for its size, so bid-ask spreads can matter more here than with mainstream index ETFs.
  • ZALT Three months of upside buys a lower ceiling. Each quarter's cap is priced off three-month options, so it lands well below what a 12-month buffer fund can offer.sec.gov
  • Buy mid-quarter and you inherit whatever cap and buffer are left, not the full 10%. The prospectus says so plainly.sec.gov
  • The fee comes out of the cushion: with the 0.69% fee counted, the prospectus puts the net buffer at 9.82% per period. No distributions so far, so return shows up in price.sec.gov

Full FFEB profile⁠

Full ZALT profile⁠

FFEB vs ZALT 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.

FFEB vs ZALT Cost

Overpaying FFEB vs ZALT

$2,770

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

  • FFEB 0.85%

    $16,199

  • ZALT 0.69%

    $13,429

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • FFEB 0.85%
  • ZALT 0.69%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K$20K051015202530FFEB $16,199ZALT $13,429

Year by year

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

Expense ratio

  • 0.85%FFEB
  • 0.69%ZALT, cheaper
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 9-12% funds
  • Median 0.79%

ZALT 14th cheapest of 77 funds

FFEB 60th cheapest of 77 funds

FFEB vs ZALT Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Payout (12M)
FFEB None
ZALT None

Distribution history

FFEBAll FFEB payments⁠

No distribution history available.

ZALTAll ZALT payments⁠

No distribution history available.

FFEB vs ZALT Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
FFEB 7.7%ZALT 3.8%, better
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
FFEB 1.60, betterZALT 1.50
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
FFEB −13.8%ZALT −8.2%since Oct 2023
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
FFEB 0.61ZALT 0.29

Popular comparisons

  • FFEBCvsAUGPB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • ZALTAvsAUGPB

    Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly · PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.50%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FFEBCvsTENJB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February · iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.53%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • ZALTAvsTENJB

    Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly · iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Jun ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.53%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FFEBCvsSIXJB

    FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETF - February · AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.85% · 0.74%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • ZALTAvsSIXJB

    Innovator U.S. Equity 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly · AllianzIM U.S. Equity 6 Month Buffer10 Jan/Jul ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.74%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.