JULP vs. PBL
JULP (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July) and PBL (PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JULP is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM, while PBL is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JULP returned 17.08% vs 19.49% for PBL. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JULP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for PBL.
Performance
JULP vs. PBL - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JULP achieves a 5.33% return, which is significantly lower than PBL's 7.85% return.
JULP
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 1.47%
- YTD
- 5.33%
- 6M
- 6.10%
- 1Y
- 17.08%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBL
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 4.07%
- YTD
- 7.85%
- 6M
- 8.56%
- 1Y
- 19.49%
- 3Y*
- 15.09%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
JULP vs. PBL - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
JULP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July | 5.33% | 13.68% | 8.37% |
PBL PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF | 7.85% | 12.35% | 10.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between JULP and PBL is 0.86, 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 | 0.86 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 9, 2024 | 0.89 |
The correlation between JULP and PBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 - 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
JULP vs. PBL — Risk / Return Rank
JULP
PBL
JULP vs. PBL - 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 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.
| JULP | PBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.38 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.54 | 1.39 | +0.15 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.84 | 3.37 | +0.47 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.97 | 13.56 | +7.41 |
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
| JULP | PBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.59 | 2.21 | +0.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.38 | 1.40 | -0.02 |
Drawdowns
JULP vs. PBL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JULP drawdown since its inception was -12.36%, which is greater than PBL's maximum drawdown of -11.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULP and PBL.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JULP | PBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.36% | -11.69% | -0.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.47% | -5.82% | +1.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -11.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.02% | -0.21% | +0.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.09% | -1.65% | +0.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.82% | 1.44% | -0.62% |
Volatility
JULP vs. PBL - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July (JULP) is 1.06%, while PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL) has a volatility of 2.51%. This indicates that JULP 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
| JULP | PBL | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.06% | 2.51% | -1.45% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.87% | 6.56% | -1.69% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.65% | 8.87% | -2.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.77% | 9.83% | -0.06% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.77% | 9.83% | -0.06% |
JULP vs. PBL - Expense Ratio Comparison
JULP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than PBL's 0.45% expense ratio.
Dividends
JULP vs. PBL - Dividend Comparison
JULP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.05%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
JULP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PBL PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF | 2.05% | 2.21% | 6.89% | 7.92% | 0.16% |
Frequently Asked Questions
JULP and PBL have a correlation of 0.86, 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 JULP (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULP dropped -12.36% vs PBL's -11.69%.
On 1-year performance, PBL leads with 19.49% vs 17.08% for JULP. On fees, PBL is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, JULP has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PBL has performed better with a 19.49% return vs 17.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PBL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for JULP.
PBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.05%, compared with 0.00% for JULP.
JULP is categorized as Defined Outcome, while PBL is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for JULP and 0.45% for PBL.
JULP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.59 vs 2.21), 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 JULP 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