JULP vs. MMAX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JULP (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July) and MMAX (iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JULP returned 17.08% vs 7.67% for MMAX. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

JULP vs. MMAX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July (JULP) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULP achieves a 5.33% return, which is significantly higher than MMAX's 3.09% return.

JULP

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 1.47%
• YTD: 5.33%
• 6M: 6.10%
• 1Y: 17.08%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MMAX

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 0.60%
• YTD: 3.09%
• 6M: 3.75%
• 1Y: 7.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JULP vs. MMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
JULP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July	5.33%	16.38%
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	3.09%	5.88%

Correlation

The correlation between JULP and MMAX is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025	0.67

The correlation between JULP and MMAX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

JULP vs. MMAX — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULP

JULP Risk / Return Rank: 84
JULP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
JULP Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
JULP Omega Ratio Rank: 87
JULP Calmar Ratio Rank: 77
JULP Martin Ratio Rank: 90

MMAX

MMAX Risk / Return Rank: 99
MMAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
MMAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Omega Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
MMAX Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

JULP vs. MMAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July (JULP) and iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX). 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.

	JULP	MMAX	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.59	5.52	-2.93
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.81	10.56	-6.75
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.54	2.51	-0.98
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.84	22.49	-18.65
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.97	112.49	-91.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JULP vs. MMAX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULP Sharpe Ratio is 2.59, which is lower than the MMAX Sharpe Ratio of 5.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULP and MMAX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	JULP	MMAX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.59	5.52	-2.93
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.38	3.13	-1.75

Drawdowns

JULP vs. MMAX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULP drawdown since its inception was -12.36%, which is greater than MMAX's maximum drawdown of -1.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULP and MMAX.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULP	MMAX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.36%	-1.93%	-10.43%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.47%	-0.34%	-4.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	-0.13%	+0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.09%	-0.10%	-0.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.82%	0.07%	+0.75%

Volatility

JULP vs. MMAX - Volatility Comparison

PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July (JULP) has a higher volatility of 1.06% compared to iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF (MMAX) at 0.36%. This indicates that JULP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MMAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JULP	MMAX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.06%	0.36%	+0.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.87%	0.96%	+3.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.65%	1.39%	+5.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.77%	2.49%	+7.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.77%	2.49%	+7.28%

JULP vs. MMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both JULP and MMAX have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

JULP vs. MMAX - Dividend Comparison

JULP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while MMAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%.

Position	TTM	2025
JULP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July	0.00%	0.00%
MMAX iShares Large Cap Max Buffer Mar ETF	1.27%	1.31%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULP and MMAX in my portfolio?

JULP and MMAX have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JULP or MMAX?

JULP has higher volatility (1.06%) compared to MMAX (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULP dropped -12.36% vs MMAX's -1.93%.

Which ETF is better, JULP or MMAX?

On 1-year performance, JULP leads with 17.08% vs 7.67% for MMAX. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, MMAX has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JULP or MMAX?

Over the 1-year period, JULP has performed better with a 17.08% return vs 7.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULP or MMAX?

JULP and MMAX have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JULP or MMAX?

MMAX has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 0.00% for JULP.

What is the main difference between JULP and MMAX?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MMAX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.52 vs 2.59), 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.