FEBZ vs. PMJN
FEBZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF) and PMJN (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June) are both Defined Outcome funds. FEBZ is passively managed, while PMJN is actively managed. Over the past year, FEBZ returned 20.13% vs 6.52% for PMJN. Their correlation of 0.87 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FEBZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMJN.
Performance
FEBZ vs. PMJN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FEBZ achieves a 7.99% return, which is significantly higher than PMJN's 2.33% return.
FEBZ
- 1D
- -0.49%
- 1M
- 4.07%
- YTD
- 7.99%
- 6M
- 7.75%
- 1Y
- 20.13%
- 3Y*
- 15.79%
- 5Y*
- 11.22%
- 10Y*
- —
PMJN
- 1D
- -0.11%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 2.33%
- 6M
- 2.88%
- 1Y
- 6.52%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FEBZ vs. PMJN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF | 7.99% | 11.77% |
PMJN PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June | 2.33% | 4.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between FEBZ and PMJN is 0.87, 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2025 | 0.87 |
The correlation between FEBZ and PMJN has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.87 - 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
FEBZ vs. PMJN — Risk / Return Rank
FEBZ
PMJN
FEBZ vs. PMJN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June (PMJN). 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.
| FEBZ | PMJN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.19 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.97 | -0.58 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.83 | 5.69 | -2.86 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.21 | 37.72 | -25.51 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FEBZ | PMJN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.17 | 3.75 | -1.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.90 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.00 | 3.81 | -2.81 |
Drawdowns
FEBZ vs. PMJN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FEBZ drawdown since its inception was -17.50%, which is greater than PMJN's maximum drawdown of -1.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBZ and PMJN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FEBZ | PMJN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.50% | -1.15% | -16.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.14% | -1.15% | -5.99% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.68% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.50% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.49% | -0.11% | -0.38% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.32% | -0.08% | -3.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.65% | 0.17% | +1.48% |
Volatility
FEBZ vs. PMJN - Volatility Comparison
TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) has a higher volatility of 2.29% compared to PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June (PMJN) at 0.19%. This indicates that FEBZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMJN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FEBZ | PMJN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.29% | 0.19% | +2.10% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.09% | 1.42% | +5.67% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.34% | 1.75% | +7.59% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.47% | 1.75% | +10.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.35% | 1.75% | +10.60% |
FEBZ vs. PMJN - Expense Ratio Comparison
FEBZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than PMJN's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
FEBZ vs. PMJN - Dividend Comparison
FEBZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.96%, while PMJN has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF | 2.96% | 3.20% | 3.88% | 6.81% |
PMJN PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FEBZ and PMJN have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FEBZ has higher volatility (2.29%) compared to PMJN (0.19%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBZ dropped -17.50% vs PMJN's -1.15%.
On 1-year performance, FEBZ leads with 20.13% vs 6.52% for PMJN. On fees, PMJN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMJN has been the lower-risk option at 0.19%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FEBZ has performed better with a 20.13% return vs 6.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PMJN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for FEBZ.
FEBZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 0.00% for PMJN.
They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for FEBZ and 0.50% for PMJN.
PMJN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.75 vs 2.17), 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.
Find the right allocation for FEBZ and PMJN
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