PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JULP vs. PBL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JULP vs. PBL - 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 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, 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*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JULP vs. PBL - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
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

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

JULP
JULP Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
JULP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JULP Sortino Ratio Rank: 8686
Sortino Ratio Rank
JULP Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
JULP Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
JULP Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
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.

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.


JULPPBLDifference
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

JULP vs. PBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULP Sharpe Ratio is 2.59, which is comparable to the PBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.21. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULP 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


JULPPBLDifference

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


JULPPBLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest 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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.02%

-0.21%

+0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.09%

-1.65%

+0.56%

Ulcer Index

Depth 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


JULPPBLDifference

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%.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
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.

Portfolio Optimizer

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