BUFG vs VTI
FT Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BUFG | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.13% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $324M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 8 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +8.55% | +14.16% | |
| 1Y Return | +14.84% | +23.62% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +13.91% | +21.43% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.33% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 10.6% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -17.6% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 26, 2021 | May 24, 2001 |
BUFG vs VTI Performance
FT Vest Buffered Allocation Growth ETF (BUFG) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BUFG returned +14.84% while VTI returned +23.62%. Year to date, BUFG is up 8.55% versus a gain of 14.16% for VTI.
Over three years, BUFG compounded at +13.91% per year against +21.43% for VTI. Across the full 5-year window we track, BUFG has the edge at +8.85% annualized vs +8.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 10.6% for BUFG. 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 -17.6% for BUFG and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.99. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BUFG charges 1.13% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $113 vs $3 annually, a gap of $110 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BUFG currently yields 0.00% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BUFG and VTI share 0 holdings out of 2790 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BUFG or VTI?
BUFG has an expense ratio of 1.13% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $110 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BUFG or VTI?
Over the past year BUFG returned +14.84% vs +23.62% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), BUFG annualized +8.85% vs +8.14% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BUFG or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 10.6% for BUFG. Worst drawdown: BUFG -17.6% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BUFG and VTI?
BUFG and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between BUFG and VTI?
BUFG and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2790 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BUFG or VTI?
BUFG yields 0.00% while VTI yields 1.07%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.