FEBT vs. PBMR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) and PBMR (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FEBT returned 20.34% vs 13.20% for PBMR. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FEBT charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBMR.

Performance

FEBT vs. PBMR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBT achieves a 7.90% return, which is significantly higher than PBMR's 4.95% return.

FEBT

• 1D: -0.34%
• 1M: 2.78%
• YTD: 7.90%
• 6M: 8.78%
• 1Y: 20.34%
• 3Y*: 16.37%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PBMR

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 1.44%
• YTD: 4.95%
• 6M: 5.91%
• 1Y: 13.20%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FEBT vs. PBMR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	7.90%	12.72%	10.75%
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March	4.95%	10.89%	9.41%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBT and PBMR is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2024	0.93

The correlation between FEBT and PBMR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FEBT vs. PBMR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 81
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 84

PBMR

PBMR Risk / Return Rank: 90
PBMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
PBMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
PBMR Omega Ratio Rank: 94
PBMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
PBMR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

FEBT vs. PBMR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR). 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.

	FEBT	PBMR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.67	3.08	-0.41
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.85	4.69	-0.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.68	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.38	3.98	-0.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.26	23.35	-6.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FEBT vs. PBMR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBT Sharpe Ratio is 2.67, which is comparable to the PBMR Sharpe Ratio of 3.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBT and PBMR, 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

	FEBT	PBMR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.67	3.08	-0.41
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.64	1.73	-0.08

Drawdowns

FEBT vs. PBMR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBT drawdown since its inception was -13.19%, which is greater than PBMR's maximum drawdown of -7.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBT and PBMR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBT	PBMR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.19%	-7.64%	-5.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.04%	-3.33%	-2.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.19%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.34%	-0.25%	-0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.18%	-0.51%	-0.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.18%	0.57%	+0.61%

Volatility

FEBT vs. PBMR - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a higher volatility of 1.28% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) at 0.77%. This indicates that FEBT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBMR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBT	PBMR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.28%	0.77%	+0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.98%	3.39%	+2.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.67%	4.31%	+3.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.75%	6.60%	+3.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.75%	6.60%	+3.15%

FEBT vs. PBMR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than PBMR's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEBT vs. PBMR - Dividend Comparison

Neither FEBT nor PBMR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBT and PBMR in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, FEBT and PBMR 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, FEBT or PBMR?

FEBT has higher volatility (1.28%) compared to PBMR (0.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBT dropped -13.19% vs PBMR's -7.64%.

Which ETF is better, FEBT or PBMR?

On 1-year performance, FEBT leads with 20.34% vs 13.20% for PBMR. On fees, PBMR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBMR has been the lower-risk option at 0.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBT or PBMR?

Over the 1-year period, FEBT has performed better with a 20.34% return vs 13.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBT or PBMR?

PBMR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FEBT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FEBT or PBMR?

FEBT and PBMR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between FEBT and PBMR?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for FEBT and 0.50% for PBMR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.08 vs 2.67), 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.