PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FEBP vs. QQQY
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FEBP vs. QQQY - 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 Defiance Nasdaq 100 Enhanced Options Income ETF (QQQY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBP achieves a 6.79% return, which is significantly lower than QQQY's 19.07% return.


FEBP

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

QQQY

1D
-0.36%
1M
9.64%
YTD
19.07%
6M
19.11%
1Y
36.38%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FEBP vs. QQQY - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
FEBP
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February
6.79%12.06%12.73%
QQQY
Defiance Nasdaq 100 Enhanced Options Income ETF
19.07%14.96%6.27%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBP and QQQY is 0.85, 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

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024

0.85

The correlation between FEBP and QQQY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.85 - 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

FEBP vs. QQQY — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBP
FEBP Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
FEBP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FEBP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
FEBP Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
FEBP Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
FEBP Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank

QQQY
QQQY Risk / Return Rank: 7474
Overall Rank
QQQY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQQY Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQQY Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
QQQY Calmar Ratio Rank: 6565
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQQY Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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.

FEBP vs. QQQY - 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 Defiance Nasdaq 100 Enhanced Options Income ETF (QQQY). 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.


FEBPQQQYDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.53

1.49

+0.04

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.41

3.28

+0.13

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

17.60

13.95

+3.65

FEBP vs. QQQY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

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


FEBPQQQYDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.68

2.68

+0.01

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.53

1.25

+0.28

Drawdowns

FEBP vs. QQQY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBP drawdown since its inception was -12.11%, smaller than the maximum QQQY drawdown of -19.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBP and QQQY.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FEBPQQQYDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.11%

-19.05%

+6.94%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.47%

-11.14%

+5.67%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

-0.36%

+0.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.91%

-2.91%

+2.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.06%

2.61%

-1.55%

Volatility

FEBP vs. QQQY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) is 1.42%, while Defiance Nasdaq 100 Enhanced Options Income ETF (QQQY) has a volatility of 4.21%. This indicates that FEBP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QQQY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FEBPQQQYDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.42%

4.21%

-2.79%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.44%

11.30%

-5.86%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.96%

13.67%

-6.71%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

8.98%

14.75%

-5.77%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.98%

14.75%

-5.77%

FEBP vs. QQQY - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than QQQY's 0.99% expense ratio.


Dividends

FEBP vs. QQQY - Dividend Comparison

FEBP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QQQY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 34.34%.


PositionTTM202520242023
FEBP
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
QQQY
Defiance Nasdaq 100 Enhanced Options Income ETF
34.34%45.34%83.34%20.64%

Frequently Asked Questions


FEBP and QQQY have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

QQQY has higher volatility (4.21%) compared to FEBP (1.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBP dropped -12.11% vs QQQY's -19.05%.

On 1-year performance, QQQY leads with 36.38% vs 18.57% for FEBP. On fees, FEBP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FEBP has been the lower-risk option at 1.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QQQY has performed better with a 36.38% return vs 18.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FEBP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for QQQY.

QQQY has the higher dividend yield at 34.34%, compared with 0.00% for FEBP.

FEBP is categorized as Options Trading, while QQQY is Nasdaq-100. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Defiance. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for FEBP and 0.99% for QQQY.

FEBP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FEBP and QQQY

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