Buffer ETFs entered the summer with fresh attention after the March volatility episode pushed the VIX to almost 31 and the July 29 spike near 21 reminded holders that calm markets do not stay calm forever. Three products sit at very different points on the protection spectrum: the iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Jun ETF (CBOE:MAXJ), the Innovator U.S. Equity Power Buffer ETF August (CBOE:PAUG), and the FT Vest Laddered Buffer ETF (CBOE:BUFR). Only MAXJ carries a true 100% downside buffer over its outcome window. PAUG and BUFR offer partial buffers around 15% and 10%, respectively, which is the framing readers need before shopping the category.
The VIX near 15 sits in the lower 8th percentile of its 12-month range, and SPY is still up about 13% year to date. That combination is exactly when buffer strategies are most often discussed, because the cost of options-based protection is low relative to the size of year-to-date gains.
MAXJ: The Only True 100% Buffer On This List
The fund on this list that offers the full 100% buffer framing, as the article’s title suggests, is MAXJ. It is structured as a defined-outcome ETF tied to the iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV), subject to a cap, over a one-year outcome period keyed to June. The mechanism shows up clearly in the holdings, with IVV representing 107.69% of net assets paired with a short derivative position at negative 9.45% transacted through Susquehanna, plus a small Micro E-mini S&P 500 futures sleeve. The options structure absorbs the downside of IVV while capping upside participation.
Net assets sit at $147 million, making MAXJ the smallest of the three funds discussed here. The expense ratio is 0.50%, the cheapest in this group, and the fund carries a low beta of 0.30. Year-to-date performance tells the trade-off story cleanly: MAXJ is up about 4% while SPY is up about 13%. Investors gave up roughly two-thirds of the index’s return in exchange for the promise of losing nothing over the outcome period, before fees.
The catch is that the 100% protection only applies to shareholders who buy at the start of the outcome window and hold through to the end. Anyone entering mid-period inherits a reduced buffer and a lower cap, which is why the iShares Max Buffer suite lists a separate outcome period return calculation on the fund’s page. The cap for the current period, once exhausted by market gains, effectively locks in a flat return for new money.
PAUG: A 15% Buffer With A Fresh August Reset
Innovator’s August-series Power Buffer is what PAUG is, with its outcome period resetting at the start of each August. The strategy holds 94.68% exposure through options on the State Street S&P 500 ETF, using in-the-money and out-of-the-money call and put combinations to absorb the first roughly 15% of losses over a one-year window while capping upside. Losses beyond 15% pass through to the investor on a one-to-one basis.
The fund carries $853 million in assets, a 0.79% expense ratio, and a beta of 0.49. Returns have been closer to the index than MAXJ, with PAUG up about 8% year to date and up about 13% over the past year. Since its August 2019 inception, PAUG has annualized at 9.38%.
The relevant distinction from MAXJ is philosophical. PAUG accepts more downside risk to hand back more upside participation. In a garden-variety pullback of 8% to 12%, PAUG shareholders incur zero index loss, while MAXJ shareholders incur zero index loss as well. In a 25% drawdown, PAUG investors lose 10%, while MAXJ investors see no gains over the outcome period.
BUFR: A Laddered Buffer Without Calendar Timing
The biggest practical problem with single-outcome buffer ETFs, figuring out the right entry month, is sidestepped by BUFR. It is an actively managed fund of funds holding 12 FT Vest U.S. Equity Buffer ETFs, one for each calendar month, each weighted between 8.27% and 8.37%. Every 30 days, one of the underlying buffers resets, meaning the fund is always somewhere in the middle of a rolling 10% buffer profile rather than tied to a specific outcome date.
Materially larger than the other two funds is BUFR, with $9.6 billion in net assets, more than an order of magnitude larger than MAXJ and roughly ten times PAUG’s asset base. The expense ratio is 0.85%, the highest of the three, reflecting the fund-of-funds structure that layers costs on top of the underlying single-month buffer ETFs. Performance has tracked closer to the index than either single-outcome fund, with BUFR up about 9% year-to-date and about 15% over one year.
The trade-off is the buffer itself. A 10% laddered buffer will not absorb the kind of drawdown that made MAXJ’s 100% protection look attractive in the first place. In a 20% correction, BUFR holders would still absorb the back 10% of the move. The upside is continuous exposure across rolling outcome periods, which removes a common source of investor error in the defined outcome category.
Choosing Between The Three
The three funds serve genuinely different investors. MAXJ fits an investor who wants the full 100% buffer branding, is willing to accept capped upside meaningfully, and can hold the June outcome period from start to finish. PAUG fits an investor who wants partial protection with room to participate in a continuing rally, resetting each August. BUFR fits an investor who does not want to think about outcome windows at all and is comfortable with a smaller 10% cushion in exchange for continuous exposure and daily liquidity at scale. The March 2026 VIX peak near 31 is the kind of event these products were built for, and the current low-volatility backdrop is when they tend to look cheapest to add.
Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.
Top Gaining Stocks
Top Losing Stocks