Data as of Nov 4, 2026.
CMAY vs XAPR: Cap, Buffer & Days Left
XAPR can fall 5.7% before its buffer engages as of Nov 4, 2026, and CMAY 4.7% as of Nov 3, 2026.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about CMAY and XAPR
Net assets: $1.2m on Nov 4, 2026 for Corgi U.S. Equities 15% Structured Buffer ETF - May Series, and $52m on Nov 3, 2026 for FT Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - April.
CMAY: reference +5.0% since period start, fund +4.0%; buffer 0 to −15; cap +11.0%; Between buffer and cap. Data to Nov 3, 2026.
CMAY: reference +5.0% since period start, fund +4.0%; buffer 0 to −15; cap +11.0%; Between buffer and cap. Data to Nov 3, 2026.XAPR: reference +8.0% since period start, fund +5.2%; buffer 0 to −15; cap +10.4%; Between buffer and cap. Data to Nov 4, 2026.
Data to Nov 4, 2026.Pair scorecard
CMAY costs 0.55 points a year less; XAPR is far larger, $52m against $1.2m.
Points (pts) are percentage points.
| Measure | CMAY | XAPR |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | not published | +8.1% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Index fall to the buffer | 4.7% | 7.4% |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | SPY | SPY |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.30% | 0.85% |
| Net assets, as of Nov 3, 2026 | $1.2m | $52m |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | not published | |
Window by window
| Total return | Gap to the reference's price return | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Window | CMAY | XAPR | CMAY | XAPR |
| 3 months | +0.7% | +1.5% | +1.1 pts | +1.9 pts |
| 6 months | +3.3% | +4.1% | −1.2 pts | −0.4 pts |
| 1 year | – | +8.1% | – | −5.5 pts |
| Since launchNot the same days: CMAY May 2026 · XAPR Apr 2024 | +3.9% | +29.9% | −2.5 pts | −23.5 pts |
Each fund's gap is to its reference's price return, dividends left out: the basis the outcome period uses. – means no data for this window. Open this comparison in the app →
Side by side
As of Nov 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
These are two different products. XAPR is a floor fund, which caps how far a holder can fall. CMAY is a buffer fund, which absorbs the first part of a fall and leaves everything below it with the holder.
Where each one stands today
XAPR resets first, on Apr 16, 2027, 163 days from now; CMAY runs to Apr 30, 2027, 178 days. A fall from here reaches CMAY’s buffer after 4.7% and XAPR’s after 5.7%. Both track SPY, so what separates them is where each is in its own period.
CMAY
The fund's price can fall 4.7% from here before the buffer starts absorbing losses, by the issuer's number. In index terms, SPY can fall 4.7% from today's level to the point where the buffer begins. Protection left, in index points: 15.0% of the 15.0% buffer still sits below today's SPY level. 178 days remained on Nov 3, 2026. On Apr 30, 2027 the period ends and a new cap is set.
XAPR
From its price on Nov 4, 2026, the fund can gain about 4.1% more before it reaches its cap. The fund's price can fall 5.7% from here before the buffer starts absorbing losses, by the issuer's number. In index terms, SPY can fall 7.4% from today's level to the point where the buffer begins. 163 days remained on Nov 4, 2026. On Apr 16, 2027 the period ends and a new cap is set.
Questions people ask
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
ETFIQ calculates every number from each issuer’s published outcome-period terms. Buffer ETFs hold options on an index, not shares, so there is no holdings overlap to report.
Every number is an ETFIQ calculation with distributions reinvested.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, CMAY against XAPR, data as of Nov 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cmay-vs-xapr
ETFIQ. (Nov 4, 2026). CMAY against XAPR. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cmay-vs-xapr
[CMAY against XAPR (ETFIQ, Nov 4, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/buffer/cmay-vs-xapr)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.