FEBP vs. PBFB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FEBP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February) and PBFB (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February) are both Options Trading funds from PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FEBP returned 18.57% vs 13.63% for PBFB. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

FEBP vs. PBFB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBP achieves a 6.79% return, which is significantly higher than PBFB's 4.68% return.

FEBP

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: 2.45%
• YTD: 6.79%
• 6M: 7.87%
• 1Y: 18.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PBFB

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.70%
• YTD: 4.68%
• 6M: 5.66%
• 1Y: 13.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FEBP vs. PBFB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FEBP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February	6.79%	12.06%	12.73%
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	4.68%	9.86%	10.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBP and PBFB is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024	0.96

The correlation between FEBP and PBFB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FEBP vs. PBFB — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBP

FEBP Risk / Return Rank: 82
FEBP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
FEBP Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FEBP Omega Ratio Rank: 87
FEBP Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FEBP Martin Ratio Rank: 85

PBFB

PBFB Risk / Return Rank: 86
PBFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
PBFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
PBFB Omega Ratio Rank: 92
PBFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
PBFB Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

FEBP vs. PBFB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB). 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.

	FEBP	PBFB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.68	2.87	-0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	4.27	-0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.61	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.41	3.61	-0.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.60	19.17	-1.57
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FEBP vs. PBFB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBP Sharpe Ratio is 2.68, which is comparable to the PBFB Sharpe Ratio of 2.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBP and PBFB, 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

	FEBP	PBFB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.68	2.87	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.53	1.67	-0.14

Drawdowns

FEBP vs. PBFB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBP drawdown since its inception was -12.11%, which is greater than PBFB's maximum drawdown of -8.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBP and PBFB.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBP	PBFB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.11%	-8.65%	-3.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.47%	-3.79%	-1.68%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.26%	-0.15%	-0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.91%	-0.60%	-0.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.06%	0.71%	+0.35%

Volatility

FEBP vs. PBFB - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) has a higher volatility of 1.42% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) at 0.75%. This indicates that FEBP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBFB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBP	PBFB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.42%	0.75%	+0.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.44%	3.71%	+1.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.96%	4.77%	+2.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	8.98%	6.39%	+2.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.98%	6.39%	+2.59%

FEBP vs. PBFB - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FEBP and PBFB have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

FEBP vs. PBFB - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBP nor PBFB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBP and PBFB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.96, FEBP and PBFB 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 is riskier, FEBP or PBFB?

FEBP has higher volatility (1.42%) compared to PBFB (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBP dropped -12.11% vs PBFB's -8.65%.

Which ETF is better, FEBP or PBFB?

On 1-year performance, FEBP leads with 18.57% vs 13.63% for PBFB. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, PBFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBP or PBFB?

Over the 1-year period, FEBP has performed better with a 18.57% return vs 13.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBP or PBFB?

FEBP and PBFB have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FEBP or PBFB?

FEBP and PBFB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.68), 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.