PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FPACX vs. PBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FPACX vs. PBL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FPACX (FPA Crescent Fund) and PBL (PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Over the past 3 years, FPACX returned 15.50%/yr vs 15.09%/yr for PBL. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FPACX charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for PBL.

Performance

FPACX vs. PBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FPA Crescent Fund (FPACX) and PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FPACX achieves a 5.34% return, which is significantly lower than PBL's 7.85% return.

FPACX

1D
0.20%
1M
2.34%
YTD
5.34%
6M
6.34%
1Y
18.57%
3Y*
15.50%
5Y*
8.88%
10Y*
10.10%

PBL

1D
-0.21%
1M
4.07%
YTD
7.85%
6M
8.56%
1Y
19.49%
3Y*
15.09%
5Y*
—
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FPACX vs. PBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
FPACX
FPA Crescent Fund		5.34%17.69%12.42%20.30%-1.68%
PBL
PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF		7.85%12.35%16.70%14.28%-3.52%

Correlation

The correlation between FPACX and PBL is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.74

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2022

0.82

The correlation between FPACX and PBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.82 - 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.

FPA Crescent Fund

PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF

Often compared with FPACX:
FPACX vs. CMNIXFPACX vs. DODBXFPACX vs. VOLMXFPACX vs. VGSTXFPACX vs. FPURXFPACX vs. GRSPXFPACX vs. FPAG
Often compared with PBL:
PBL vs. SPYPBL vs. DDXPBL vs. EAOKPBL vs. PUSHPBL vs. RULEPBL vs. DWATPBL vs. PJFV

Return for Risk

FPACX vs. PBL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
FPACX
FPACX Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
FPACX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FPACX Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
FPACX Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
FPACX Calmar Ratio Rank: 4646
Calmar Ratio Rank
FPACX Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank
PBL
PBL Risk / Return Rank: 6868
Overall Rank
PBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 6868
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBL Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
PBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBL Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

FPACX vs. PBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FPA Crescent Fund (FPACX) and PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL). 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.

FPACXPBLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
2.20
2.21

-0.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
3.22
3.10

+0.12

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.42

1.39

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.59

3.37

-0.78

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.81

13.56

-3.75

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FPACX vs. PBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FPACX Sharpe Ratio is 2.20, which is comparable to the PBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FPACX and PBL, 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

FPACXPBLDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.20

2.21

-0.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.75

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.77

—

—

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.88

1.40

-0.52

Drawdowns

FPACX vs. PBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FPACX drawdown since its inception was -31.60%, which is greater than PBL's maximum drawdown of -11.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FPACX and PBL.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FPACXPBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.60%

-11.69%

-19.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.37%

-5.82%

-1.55%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.95%

-11.69%

+0.74%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.47%

—

—

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-29.46%

—

—

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.02%

-0.21%

+0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.88%

-1.65%

-2.23%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.94%

1.44%

+0.50%

Volatility

FPACX vs. PBL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FPA Crescent Fund (FPACX) is 2.28%, while PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL) has a volatility of 2.51%. This indicates that FPACX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FPACXPBLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.28%

2.51%

-0.23%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

6.65%

6.56%

+0.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.66%

8.87%

-0.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.88%

9.83%

+2.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.20%

9.83%

+3.37%

FPACX vs. PBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

FPACX has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than PBL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

FPACX vs. PBL - Dividend Comparison

FPACX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.11%, more than PBL's 2.05% yield.

PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FPACX
FPA Crescent Fund		9.11%9.60%7.95%3.72%0.77%11.62%4.80%4.65%8.87%3.70%4.98%6.34%
PBL
PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF		2.05%2.21%6.89%7.92%0.16%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

FPACX and PBL have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PBL has higher volatility (2.51%) compared to FPACX (2.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FPACX dropped -31.60% vs PBL's -11.69%.

PBL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.21 vs 2.20), 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 FPACX and PBL

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