PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BUFP vs. MMAX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BUFP vs. MMAX - 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 iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFP achieves a 6.33% return, which is significantly higher than MMAX's 3.01% return.


BUFP

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

MMAX

1D
-0.04%
1M
0.09%
YTD
3.01%
6M
3.19%
1Y
7.29%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BUFP vs. MMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BUFP and MMAX is 0.66, 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

0.66

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025

0.69

The correlation between BUFP and MMAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.69 - 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

BUFP vs. MMAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFP
BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 9292
Martin Ratio Rank

MMAX
MMAX Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
MMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
MMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
MMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
MMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank
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. MMAX - 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 iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). 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.


BUFPMMAXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-5.26

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.57

2.35

-0.78

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.94

15.86

-11.92

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.61

84.16

-62.55

BUFP vs. MMAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFP Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is lower than the MMAX Sharpe Ratio of 5.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFP and MMAX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

BUFP vs. MMAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFP drawdown since its inception was -11.98%, which is greater than MMAX's maximum drawdown of -1.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFP and MMAX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BUFPMMAXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.98%

-1.93%

-10.05%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.41%

-0.46%

-3.95%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.19%

-0.20%

+0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.99%

-0.11%

-0.88%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.80%

0.09%

+0.71%

Volatility

BUFP vs. MMAX - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) has a higher volatility of 1.99% compared to iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX) at 0.52%. This indicates that BUFP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MMAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BUFPMMAXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.99%

0.52%

+1.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.11%

1.06%

+4.05%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.40%

1.42%

+4.98%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.46%

2.48%

+6.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.46%

2.48%

+6.98%

BUFP vs. MMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BUFP and MMAX have an expense ratio of 0.50%.


Dividends

BUFP vs. MMAX - Dividend Comparison

BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than MMAX's 1.28% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
BUFP
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF
0.01%0.01%0.02%
MMAX
iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF
1.28%1.31%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


BUFP and MMAX have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BUFP has higher volatility (1.99%) compared to MMAX (0.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFP dropped -11.98% vs MMAX's -1.93%.

On 1-year performance, BUFP leads with 17.31% vs 7.29% for MMAX. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, MMAX has been the lower-risk option at 0.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BUFP has performed better with a 17.31% return vs 7.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BUFP and MMAX have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

MMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.28%, compared with 0.01% for BUFP.

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares.

MMAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.15 vs 2.72), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BUFP and MMAX

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