PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FBUF vs. PBFR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FBUF vs. PBFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBUF achieves a 5.32% return, which is significantly higher than PBFR's 4.52% return.


FBUF

1D
-0.12%
1M
2.85%
YTD
5.32%
6M
6.28%
1Y
19.61%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

PBFR

1D
-0.16%
1M
1.58%
YTD
4.52%
6M
5.34%
1Y
12.83%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FBUF vs. PBFR - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
FBUF
Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF
5.32%14.01%7.85%
PBFR
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF
4.52%10.44%5.53%

Correlation

The correlation between FBUF and PBFR is 0.84, 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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024

0.84

The correlation between FBUF and PBFR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.84 - 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

FBUF vs. PBFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBUF
FBUF Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
FBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
FBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

PBFR
PBFR Risk / Return Rank: 9090
Overall Rank
PBFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBFR Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
PBFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8484
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBFR Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

FBUF vs. PBFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). 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.


FBUFPBFRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.35

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.53

1.66

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.51

4.57

-1.07

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.68

24.09

-8.41

FBUF vs. PBFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBUF Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is comparable to the PBFR Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBUF and PBFR, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FBUFPBFRDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.63

2.99

-0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.47

1.54

-0.07

Drawdowns

FBUF vs. PBFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBUF drawdown since its inception was -11.09%, which is greater than PBFR's maximum drawdown of -8.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBUF and PBFR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FBUFPBFRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.09%

-8.50%

-2.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.61%

-2.82%

-2.79%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.22%

-0.16%

-0.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.38%

-0.63%

-0.75%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.25%

0.53%

+0.72%

Volatility

FBUF vs. PBFR - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) has a higher volatility of 1.11% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) at 0.64%. This indicates that FBUF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FBUFPBFRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.11%

0.64%

+0.47%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.37%

3.34%

+2.03%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.49%

4.33%

+3.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.55%

6.89%

+2.66%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.55%

6.89%

+2.66%

FBUF vs. PBFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBUF has a 0.48% expense ratio, which is lower than PBFR's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

FBUF vs. PBFR - Dividend Comparison

FBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%, more than PBFR's 0.01% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
FBUF
Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF
0.63%0.64%0.54%
PBFR
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF
0.01%0.01%0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions


FBUF and PBFR have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FBUF has higher volatility (1.11%) compared to PBFR (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBUF dropped -11.09% vs PBFR's -8.50%.

On 1-year performance, FBUF leads with 19.61% vs 12.83% for PBFR. On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, PBFR has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FBUF has performed better with a 19.61% return vs 12.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PBFR.

FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.01% for PBFR.

They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.48% for FBUF and 0.50% for PBFR.

PBFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 2.63), 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 FBUF and PBFR

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