AMZP vs. PBAP
AMZP (Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF) and PBAP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AMZP returned 23.84% vs 13.68% for PBAP. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. AMZP charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBAP.
Performance
AMZP vs. PBAP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AMZP achieves a 8.22% return, which is significantly higher than PBAP's 6.83% return.
AMZP
- 1D
- -1.91%
- 1M
- -5.00%
- YTD
- 8.22%
- 6M
- 7.97%
- 1Y
- 23.84%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBAP
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 1.19%
- YTD
- 6.83%
- 6M
- 7.73%
- 1Y
- 13.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AMZP vs. PBAP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
AMZP Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF | 8.22% | 9.56% | 18.68% |
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April | 6.83% | 6.34% | 8.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between AMZP and PBAP is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024 | 0.55 |
The correlation between AMZP and PBAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.47 to 0.55 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
AMZP vs. PBAP — Risk / Return Rank
AMZP
PBAP
AMZP vs. PBAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF (AMZP) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP). 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.
| AMZP | PBAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.83 | 4.41 | -3.59 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.28 | 7.56 | -6.28 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 2.20 | -1.03 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.05 | 11.84 | -10.79 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.71 | 85.46 | -82.75 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| AMZP | PBAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.83 | 4.41 | -3.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.92 | 1.46 | -0.54 |
Drawdowns
AMZP vs. PBAP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AMZP drawdown since its inception was -27.36%, which is greater than PBAP's maximum drawdown of -9.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AMZP and PBAP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AMZP | PBAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.36% | -9.70% | -17.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.64% | -1.17% | -22.47% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.65% | 0.00% | -7.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.02% | -0.79% | -5.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.15% | 0.16% | +8.99% |
Volatility
AMZP vs. PBAP - Volatility Comparison
Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF (AMZP) has a higher volatility of 8.11% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) at 0.59%. This indicates that AMZP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AMZP | PBAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.11% | 0.59% | +7.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 22.00% | 1.99% | +20.01% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.99% | 3.11% | +25.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.81% | 7.11% | +19.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.81% | 7.11% | +19.70% |
AMZP vs. PBAP - Expense Ratio Comparison
AMZP has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than PBAP's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
AMZP vs. PBAP - Dividend Comparison
AMZP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.00%, while PBAP has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
AMZP Kurv Yield Premium Strategy Amazon AMZN ETF | 19.00% | 22.04% | 15.15% | 2.45% |
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AMZP and PBAP have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AMZP has higher volatility (8.11%) compared to PBAP (0.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AMZP dropped -27.36% vs PBAP's -9.70%.
On 1-year performance, AMZP leads with 23.84% vs 13.68% for PBAP. On fees, PBAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AMZP has performed better with a 23.84% return vs 13.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PBAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for AMZP.
AMZP has the higher dividend yield at 19.00%, compared with 0.00% for PBAP.
They also come from different issuers: Kurv and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for AMZP and 0.50% for PBAP.
PBAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.41 vs 0.83), 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.
Find the right allocation for AMZP and PBAP
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer