BUFP vs. PAB

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) and PAB (PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFP is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500, while PAB is a Intermediate Core Bond fund actively managed by PGIM. BUFP is passively managed, while PAB is actively managed. Over the past year, BUFP returned 14.46% vs 4.42% for PAB. At a 0.18 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BUFP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for PAB.

Performance

BUFP vs. PAB - 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 PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BUFP achieves a 7.12% return, which is significantly higher than PAB's 0.22% return.

BUFP

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 1.46%
• 6M: 6.33%
• YTD: 7.12%
• 1Y: 14.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PAB

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -0.21%
• 6M: -0.02%
• YTD: 0.22%
• 1Y: 4.42%
• 3Y*: 4.75%
• 5Y*: -0.02%
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFP vs. PAB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	7.12%	12.92%	6.30%
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	0.22%	7.55%	1.93%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFP and PAB is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2024	0.18

Return for Risk

BUFP vs. PAB — 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: 90
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

PAB

PAB Risk / Return Rank: 34
PAB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
PAB Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
PAB Omega Ratio Rank: 33
PAB Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
PAB Martin Ratio Rank: 33

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. PAB - 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 PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB). 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	PAB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.26	1.05	+1.21
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.34	1.57	+1.78
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.18	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.26	1.41	+1.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.66	3.92	+13.74

BUFP vs. PAB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFP Sharpe Ratio is 2.26, which is higher than the PAB Sharpe Ratio of 1.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFP and PAB, 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

BUFP vs. PAB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFP drawdown since its inception was -11.98%, smaller than the maximum PAB drawdown of -19.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFP and PAB.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFP	PAB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.98%	-19.27%	+7.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.41%	-2.86%	-1.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-5.95%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.27%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-1.65%	+1.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.98%	-7.70%	+6.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.81%	1.03%	-0.22%

Volatility

BUFP vs. PAB - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) has a higher volatility of 1.95% compared to PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB) at 1.24%. This indicates that BUFP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PAB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BUFP	PAB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.95%	1.24%	+0.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.16%	2.98%	+2.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.34%	3.83%	+2.51%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.37%	6.22%	+3.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.37%	6.12%	+3.25%

BUFP vs. PAB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than PAB's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFP vs. PAB - Dividend Comparison

BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than PAB's 4.61% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	4.61%	4.28%	4.25%	3.70%	2.81%	2.34%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFP and PAB in my portfolio?

BUFP and PAB have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUFP or PAB?

BUFP has higher volatility (1.95%) compared to PAB (1.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFP dropped -11.98% vs PAB's -19.27%.

Which ETF is better, BUFP or PAB?

On 1-year performance, BUFP leads with 14.46% vs 4.42% for PAB. On fees, PAB is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, PAB has been the lower-risk option at 1.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFP or PAB?

Over the 1-year period, BUFP has performed better with a 14.46% return vs 4.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFP or PAB?

PAB is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for BUFP.

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

PAB has the higher dividend yield at 4.61%, compared with 0.01% for BUFP.

What is the main difference between BUFP and PAB?

BUFP is categorized as Defined Outcome, while PAB is Intermediate Core Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BUFP and 0.19% for PAB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BUFP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.05), 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.