FHDG vs. PBFR
FHDG (FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly Dynamic Buffer ETF) and PBFR (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, FHDG returned 15.96% vs 12.83% for PBFR. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FHDG charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBFR.
Performance
FHDG vs. PBFR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FHDG achieves a 6.70% return, which is significantly higher than PBFR's 4.52% return.
FHDG
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 1.94%
- YTD
- 6.70%
- 6M
- 7.46%
- 1Y
- 15.96%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBFR
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 1.58%
- YTD
- 4.52%
- 6M
- 5.34%
- 1Y
- 12.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FHDG vs. PBFR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
FHDG FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly Dynamic Buffer ETF | 6.70% | 10.56% | 0.53% |
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF | 4.52% | 10.44% | 0.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between FHDG and PBFR is 0.88, 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 | 0.88 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2024 | 0.88 |
The correlation between FHDG and PBFR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.88 - 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
FHDG vs. PBFR — Risk / Return Rank
FHDG
PBFR
FHDG vs. PBFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly Dynamic Buffer ETF (FHDG) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). 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.
| FHDG | PBFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.01 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.65 | 1.66 | 0.00 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.04 | 4.57 | -0.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 22.17 | 24.09 | -1.91 |
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
| FHDG | PBFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.97 | 2.99 | -0.01 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.01 | 1.54 | -0.53 |
Drawdowns
FHDG vs. PBFR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FHDG drawdown since its inception was -14.01%, which is greater than PBFR's maximum drawdown of -8.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FHDG and PBFR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FHDG | PBFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.01% | -8.50% | -5.51% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.96% | -2.82% | -1.14% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.19% | -0.16% | -0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.12% | -0.63% | -0.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.72% | 0.53% | +0.19% |
Volatility
FHDG vs. PBFR - Volatility Comparison
FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly Dynamic Buffer ETF (FHDG) has a higher volatility of 0.72% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) at 0.64%. This indicates that FHDG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FHDG | PBFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.72% | 0.64% | +0.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.38% | 3.34% | +1.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.39% | 4.33% | +1.06% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.72% | 6.89% | +4.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.72% | 6.89% | +4.83% |
FHDG vs. PBFR - Expense Ratio Comparison
FHDG has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PBFR's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
FHDG vs. PBFR - Dividend Comparison
FHDG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PBFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
FHDG FT Vest U.S. Equity Quarterly Dynamic Buffer ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FHDG and PBFR have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FHDG has higher volatility (0.72%) compared to PBFR (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FHDG dropped -14.01% vs PBFR's -8.50%.
On 1-year performance, FHDG leads with 15.96% vs 12.83% for PBFR. On fees, PBFR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, FHDG has performed better with a 15.96% return vs 12.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PBFR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for FHDG.
PBFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for FHDG.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for FHDG and 0.50% for PBFR.
PBFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 2.97), 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 FHDG and PBFR
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