BUFP vs. JULB

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) and JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. BUFP is passively managed, while JULB is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BUFP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for JULB.

Performance

BUFP vs. JULB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFP achieves a 6.33% return, which is significantly lower than JULB's 6.77% return.

BUFP

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 0.57%
• YTD: 6.33%
• 6M: 6.42%
• 1Y: 17.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JULB

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.99%
• YTD: 6.77%
• 6M: 6.67%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFP vs. JULB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	6.33%	2.80%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	6.77%	2.44%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFP and JULB is 0.92, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2025	0.92

Return for Risk

BUFP vs. JULB — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFP

BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 88
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 91
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

JULB

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

BUFP vs. JULB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). 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.

	BUFP	JULB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.72	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.02	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.94	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.61	—	—

Drawdowns

BUFP vs. JULB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFP drawdown since its inception was -11.98%, which is greater than JULB's maximum drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFP and JULB.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFP	JULB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.98%	-5.24%	-6.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.41%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	-0.06%	-0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.99%	-0.84%	-0.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.80%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BUFP	JULB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.99%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.11%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.40%	6.84%	-0.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.46%	6.84%	+2.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.46%	6.84%	+2.62%

BUFP vs. JULB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than JULB's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFP vs. JULB - Dividend Comparison

BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, while JULB has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFP and JULB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, BUFP and JULB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, BUFP or JULB?

On fees, JULB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFP or JULB?

JULB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BUFP.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BUFP or JULB?

BUFP has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for JULB.

What is the main difference between BUFP and JULB?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Aptus Capital Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BUFP and 0.25% for JULB.