AUGP vs. PMFB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

AUGP (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August) and PMFB (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February) are both Defined Outcome funds from PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, AUGP returned 18.42% vs 8.06% for PMFB. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

AUGP vs. PMFB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August (AUGP) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, AUGP achieves a 5.66% return, which is significantly higher than PMFB's 2.56% return.

AUGP

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 1.97%
• YTD: 5.66%
• 6M: 6.41%
• 1Y: 18.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PMFB

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.80%
• YTD: 2.56%
• 6M: 3.26%
• 1Y: 8.06%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AUGP vs. PMFB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AUGP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August	5.66%	13.08%
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February	2.56%	6.28%

Correlation

The correlation between AUGP and PMFB is 0.88, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2025	0.87

The correlation between AUGP and PMFB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

AUGP vs. PMFB — Risk / Return Rank

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

AUGP

AUGP Risk / Return Rank: 85
AUGP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
AUGP Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
AUGP Omega Ratio Rank: 88
AUGP Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
AUGP Martin Ratio Rank: 90

PMFB

PMFB Risk / Return Rank: 95
PMFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
PMFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
PMFB Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

AUGP vs. PMFB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August (AUGP) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB). 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.

	AUGP	PMFB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.70	3.83	-1.13
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.90	6.15	-2.25
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	1.88	-0.33
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.75	6.04	-2.29
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.24	31.52	-11.28
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

AUGP vs. PMFB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current AUGP Sharpe Ratio is 2.70, which is comparable to the PMFB Sharpe Ratio of 3.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of AUGP and PMFB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	AUGP	PMFB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.70	3.83	-1.13
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.47	2.43	-0.97

Drawdowns

AUGP vs. PMFB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AUGP drawdown since its inception was -12.03%, which is greater than PMFB's maximum drawdown of -2.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AUGP and PMFB.

Drawdown Indicators

	AUGP	PMFB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.03%	-2.94%	-9.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.93%	-1.34%	-3.59%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.09%	-0.06%	-0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.99%	-0.37%	-0.62%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.91%	0.26%	+0.65%

Volatility

AUGP vs. PMFB - Volatility Comparison

PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - August (AUGP) has a higher volatility of 1.19% compared to PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) at 0.37%. This indicates that AUGP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMFB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	AUGP	PMFB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.19%	0.37%	+0.82%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.20%	1.43%	+3.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.87%	2.12%	+4.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.68%	2.77%	+6.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.68%	2.77%	+6.91%

AUGP vs. PMFB - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both AUGP and PMFB have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

AUGP vs. PMFB - Dividend Comparison

Neither AUGP nor PMFB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AUGP and PMFB in my portfolio?

AUGP and PMFB have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, AUGP or PMFB?

AUGP has higher volatility (1.19%) compared to PMFB (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AUGP dropped -12.03% vs PMFB's -2.94%.

Which ETF is better, AUGP or PMFB?

On 1-year performance, AUGP leads with 18.42% vs 8.06% for PMFB. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, PMFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, AUGP or PMFB?

Over the 1-year period, AUGP has performed better with a 18.42% return vs 8.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, AUGP or PMFB?

AUGP and PMFB have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AUGP or PMFB?

AUGP and PMFB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.83 vs 2.70), 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.