FEBP vs. PUSH

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) and PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH).

FEBP and PUSH are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. FEBP is an actively managed fund by PGIM. It was launched on Jan 31, 2024. PUSH is an actively managed fund by PGIM. It was launched on Jun 24, 2024.

Performance

FEBP vs. PUSH - 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 Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

FEBP vs. PUSH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FEBP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February	-1.82%	12.06%	5.70%
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF	0.64%	4.16%	1.74%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBP achieves a -1.82% return, which is significantly lower than PUSH's 0.64% return.

FEBP

• 1D: 1.86%
• 1M: -3.04%
• YTD: -1.82%
• 6M: 1.02%
• 1Y: 13.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PUSH

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -0.37%
• YTD: 0.64%
• 6M: 1.46%
• 1Y: 3.70%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FEBP vs. PUSH - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than PUSH's 0.15% expense ratio.

FEBP

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February

PUSH

PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF

Return for Risk

FEBP vs. PUSH — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBP

FEBP Risk / Return Rank: 71
FEBP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
FEBP Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
FEBP Omega Ratio Rank: 75
FEBP Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FEBP Martin Ratio Rank: 80

PUSH

PUSH Risk / Return Rank: 95
PUSH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
PUSH Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
PUSH Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PUSH Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PUSH Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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. PUSH - 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 Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH). 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	PUSH	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	2.27	-1.08
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.79	3.31	-1.52
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.61	-0.32
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.71	4.34	-2.62
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.14	15.34	-6.20
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. PUSH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBP Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is lower than the PUSH Sharpe Ratio of 2.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBP and PUSH, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FEBP	PUSH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.19	2.27	-1.08
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.15	2.84	-1.69

Correlation

The correlation between FEBP and PUSH is 0.05, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

FEBP vs. PUSH - Dividend Comparison

FEBP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PUSH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.60%.

	TTM	2025	2024
FEBP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF	3.60%	3.45%	1.86%

Drawdowns

FEBP vs. PUSH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBP drawdown since its inception was -12.11%, which is greater than PUSH's maximum drawdown of -0.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBP and PUSH.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBP	PUSH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.11%	-0.85%	-11.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.19%	-0.85%	-7.34%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.71%	-0.37%	-3.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.95%	-0.11%	-0.84%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.54%	0.24%	+1.30%

Volatility

FEBP vs. PUSH - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) has a higher volatility of 3.47% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) at 0.23%. This indicates that FEBP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PUSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBP	PUSH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.47%	0.23%	+3.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.55%	1.08%	+4.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.60%	1.64%	+9.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.16%	1.33%	+7.83%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.16%	1.33%	+7.83%