PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
GFEB vs. PBAP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

GFEB vs. PBAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GFEB achieves a 5.83% return, which is significantly lower than PBAP's 6.70% return.


GFEB

1D
-0.21%
1M
1.89%
YTD
5.83%
6M
6.55%
1Y
15.17%
3Y*
13.04%
5Y*
10Y*

PBAP

1D
-0.13%
1M
1.19%
YTD
6.70%
6M
7.49%
1Y
13.30%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GFEB vs. PBAP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between GFEB and PBAP is 0.83, 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

0.83

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

0.85

The correlation between GFEB and PBAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 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

GFEB vs. PBAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

GFEB
GFEB Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
GFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
GFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
GFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
GFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

PBAP
PBAP Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
PBAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
PBAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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.

GFEB vs. PBAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP). 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.


GFEBPBAPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.52

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.56

2.15

-0.59

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.41

11.41

-7.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.40

82.09

-63.69

GFEB vs. PBAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GFEB Sharpe Ratio is 2.77, which is lower than the PBAP Sharpe Ratio of 4.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GFEB and PBAP, 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


GFEBPBAPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.77

4.29

-1.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.79

1.45

+0.34

Drawdowns

GFEB vs. PBAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GFEB drawdown since its inception was -9.63%, roughly equal to the maximum PBAP drawdown of -9.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GFEB and PBAP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GFEBPBAPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.63%

-9.70%

+0.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.46%

-1.17%

-3.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.21%

-0.13%

-0.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.69%

-0.79%

+0.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.83%

0.16%

+0.67%

Volatility

GFEB vs. PBAP - Volatility Comparison

FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) has a higher volatility of 0.91% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) at 0.59%. This indicates that GFEB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GFEBPBAPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.91%

0.59%

+0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.21%

2.00%

+2.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.51%

3.12%

+2.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.57%

7.10%

+0.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.57%

7.10%

+0.47%

GFEB vs. PBAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

GFEB has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PBAP's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

GFEB vs. PBAP - Dividend Comparison

Neither GFEB nor PBAP has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GFEB and PBAP have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GFEB has higher volatility (0.91%) compared to PBAP (0.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GFEB dropped -9.63% vs PBAP's -9.70%.

On 1-year performance, GFEB leads with 15.17% vs 13.30% for PBAP. On fees, PBAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, GFEB has performed better with a 15.17% return vs 13.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PBAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GFEB.

GFEB and PBAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: FT Vest and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for GFEB and 0.50% for PBAP.

PBAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.29 vs 2.77), 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 GFEB and PBAP

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