ABLS vs. RB

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

ABLS (Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF) and RB (ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ABLS is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders Index, while RB is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Russell 2000. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ABLS returned 11.11% vs 18.24% for RB. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ABLS charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RB.

Performance

ABLS vs. RB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF (ABLS) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ABLS achieves a 14.80% return, which is significantly higher than RB's 7.90% return.

ABLS

• 1D: -1.49%
• 1M: 5.12%
• 6M: 13.24%
• YTD: 14.80%
• 1Y: 11.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RB

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.02%
• 6M: 5.39%
• YTD: 7.90%
• 1Y: 18.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ABLS vs. RB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ABLS Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF	14.80%	-2.65%
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	7.90%	10.85%

Correlation

The correlation between ABLS and RB is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.62

The correlation between ABLS and RB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.62 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ABLS vs. RB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ABLS

ABLS Risk / Return Rank: 21
ABLS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
ABLS Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
ABLS Omega Ratio Rank: 20
ABLS Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
ABLS Martin Ratio Rank: 21

RB

RB Risk / Return Rank: 96
RB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
RB Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
RB Omega Ratio Rank: 95
RB Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
RB Martin Ratio Rank: 96

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ABLS vs. RB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF (ABLS) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ABLS	RB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.62	2.79	-2.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.00	4.74	-3.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	1.61	-0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.69	8.77	-8.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.93	28.21	-26.28

ABLS vs. RB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABLS Sharpe Ratio is 0.62, which is lower than the RB Sharpe Ratio of 2.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ABLS and RB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ABLS vs. RB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABLS drawdown since its inception was -19.28%, which is greater than RB's maximum drawdown of -2.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABLS and RB.

Drawdown Indicators

	ABLS	RB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.28%	-2.09%	-17.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.19%	-2.09%	-14.10%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.79%	-0.54%	-3.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.87%	-0.44%	-7.43%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.77%	0.65%	+5.12%

Volatility

ABLS vs. RB - Volatility Comparison

Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF (ABLS) has a higher volatility of 5.25% compared to ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) at 1.54%. This indicates that ABLS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ABLS	RB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.25%	1.54%	+3.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.62%	4.74%	+8.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.04%	6.57%	+11.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.11%	6.46%	+14.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.11%	6.46%	+14.65%

ABLS vs. RB - Expense Ratio Comparison

ABLS has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than RB's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

ABLS vs. RB - Dividend Comparison

ABLS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 12.54%, more than RB's 2.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
ABLS Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders ETF	12.54%	14.04%
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	2.27%	1.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ABLS and RB in my portfolio?

ABLS and RB have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ABLS or RB?

ABLS has higher volatility (5.25%) compared to RB (1.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABLS dropped -19.28% vs RB's -2.09%.

Which ETF is better, ABLS or RB?

On 1-year performance, RB leads with 18.24% vs 11.11% for ABLS. On fees, ABLS is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, RB has been the lower-risk option at 1.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ABLS or RB?

Over the 1-year period, RB has performed better with a 18.24% return vs 11.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ABLS or RB?

ABLS is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ABLS or RB?

ABLS has the higher dividend yield at 12.54%, compared with 2.27% for RB.

What is the main difference between ABLS and RB?

ABLS is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while RB is Defined Outcome. ABLS tracks Abacus FCF Small Cap Leaders Index, while RB tracks Russell 2000. They also come from different issuers: Abacus and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ABLS and 0.58% for RB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 0.62), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.