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

Performance

GJUL 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 - July (GJUL) 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, GJUL achieves a 4.70% return, which is significantly lower than PBAP's 6.70% return.


GJUL

1D
-0.03%
1M
1.47%
YTD
4.70%
6M
5.27%
1Y
15.22%
3Y*
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)

GJUL vs. PBAP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between GJUL 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

0.88

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

GJUL vs. PBAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

GJUL
GJUL Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
GJUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8484
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GJUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
GJUL Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
GJUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
GJUL Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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.

GJUL 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 - July (GJUL) 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.


GJULPBAPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-3.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

2.15

-0.58

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.02

11.41

-7.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.57

82.09

-60.52

GJUL vs. PBAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GJUL Sharpe Ratio is 2.73, which is lower than the PBAP Sharpe Ratio of 4.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GJUL 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


GJULPBAPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.73

4.29

-1.56

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.58

1.45

+0.13

Drawdowns

GJUL vs. PBAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GJUL drawdown since its inception was -10.68%, which is greater than PBAP's maximum drawdown of -9.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GJUL and PBAP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


GJULPBAPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.68%

-9.70%

-0.98%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.81%

-1.17%

-2.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.03%

-0.13%

+0.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.89%

-0.79%

-0.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.71%

0.16%

+0.55%

Volatility

GJUL vs. PBAP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - July (GJUL) is 0.47%, while PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) has a volatility of 0.59%. This indicates that GJUL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


GJULPBAPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.47%

0.59%

-0.12%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.07%

2.00%

+2.07%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.62%

3.12%

+2.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.96%

7.10%

+0.86%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.96%

7.10%

+0.86%

GJUL vs. PBAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

GJUL vs. PBAP - Dividend Comparison

Neither GJUL nor PBAP has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


GJUL 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.

PBAP has higher volatility (0.59%) compared to GJUL (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GJUL dropped -10.68% vs PBAP's -9.70%.

On 1-year performance, GJUL leads with 15.22% vs 13.30% for PBAP. On fees, PBAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, GJUL has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, GJUL has performed better with a 15.22% 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 GJUL.

GJUL 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 GJUL and 0.50% for PBAP.

PBAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.29 vs 2.73), 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 GJUL 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