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

Performance

JULP vs. PQAP - 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 Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP). 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 PQAP's 12.09% return.


JULP

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

PQAP

1D
-0.12%
1M
2.44%
YTD
12.09%
6M
13.01%
1Y
21.47%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JULP vs. PQAP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between JULP and PQAP is 0.84, 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

0.84

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2025

0.87

The correlation between JULP and PQAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.87 - 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. PQAP — 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

PQAP
PQAP Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
PQAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PQAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
PQAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
PQAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9898
Calmar Ratio Rank
PQAP 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.

JULP vs. PQAP - 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 Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP). 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.


JULPPQAPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.27

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-4.66

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.54

2.20

-0.66

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.84

15.50

-11.66

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

20.97

86.25

-65.28

JULP vs. PQAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULP Sharpe Ratio is 2.59, which is lower than the PQAP Sharpe Ratio of 4.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULP and PQAP, 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


JULPPQAPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.59

4.86

-2.27

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.38

1.76

-0.38

Drawdowns

JULP vs. PQAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULP drawdown since its inception was -12.36%, which is greater than PQAP's maximum drawdown of -10.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULP and PQAP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JULPPQAPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.36%

-10.79%

-1.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.47%

-1.39%

-3.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.02%

-0.12%

+0.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.09%

-0.60%

-0.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.82%

0.25%

+0.57%

Volatility

JULP vs. PQAP - Volatility Comparison

PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July (JULP) and PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) have volatilities of 1.06% and 1.02%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JULPPQAPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.06%

1.02%

+0.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.87%

3.09%

+1.78%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.65%

4.45%

+2.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.77%

11.03%

-1.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.77%

11.03%

-1.26%

JULP vs. PQAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

JULP vs. PQAP - Dividend Comparison

JULP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PQAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%.


Frequently Asked Questions


JULP and PQAP have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

JULP has higher volatility (1.06%) compared to PQAP (1.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULP dropped -12.36% vs PQAP's -10.79%.

On 1-year performance, PQAP leads with 21.47% vs 17.08% for JULP. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, PQAP has performed better with a 21.47% return vs 17.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

PQAP has the higher dividend yield at 0.02%, compared with 0.00% for JULP.

PQAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.86 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for JULP and PQAP

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