BUFC vs METD
AB Conservative Buffer ETF vs Direxion Daily META Bear 1X ETF
Which is better, BUFC or METD?
BUFC has been ahead.
BUFC has a lower expense ratio. BUFC led over 1Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BUFC | METD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69%Best | 1.02% |
| AUM | $1.1B | $16M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 2.59% |
| Holdings | 7 | 16 |
| YTD Return | +5.58%Best | -21.18% |
| 1Y Return | +7.48%Best | -14.05% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 3.3%Best | 32.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -8.3%Best | -50.6% |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $11,784Best | $5,500 |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Direxion Shares ETF Trust |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Dec 13, 2023 | Jun 5, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 5, 2024 to Oct 12, 2026 (2.4 years).
BUFC vs METD growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.4 years both funds cover.
BUFC vs METD Performance
AB Conservative Buffer ETF (BUFC) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and Direxion Daily META Bear 1X ETF (METD) is an ETF from Direxion Shares ETF Trust. Over the past year BUFC returned +7.48% while METD returned -14.05%. Year to date, BUFC is up 5.58% versus a loss of 21.18% for METD.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
METD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 32.0% compared with 3.3% for BUFC. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -8.3% for BUFC and -50.6% for METD. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at -0.48. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BUFC charges 0.69% per year while METD charges 1.02%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $102 annually, a gap of $33 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BUFC currently yields 0.00% against 2.59% for METD.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BUFC and METD you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BUFC or METD?
BUFC has an expense ratio of 0.69% while METD charges 1.02%. BUFC is the cheaper option, by $33 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BUFC or METD?
Over the past year BUFC returned +7.48% vs -14.05% for METD, so BUFC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), BUFC annualized +7.08% vs -22.05% for METD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BUFC or METD?
METD has been the more volatile fund at 32.0% annualized versus 3.3% for BUFC. Worst drawdown: BUFC -8.3% vs METD -50.6%.
Should I hold both BUFC and METD?
BUFC and METD have a monthly-return correlation of -0.48, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, BUFC or METD?
BUFC yields 0.00% while METD yields 2.59%, so METD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is METD better than BUFC?
BUFC has a lower expense ratio. BUFC led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.