JULP vs. PQOC

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

JULP (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July) and PQOC (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - October) are both Defined Outcome funds from PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JULP returned 13.03% vs 15.84% for PQOC. Their correlation of 0.89 means they have usually moved in the same direction. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

JULP vs. PQOC - 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 - October (PQOC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULP achieves a 6.29% return, which is significantly lower than PQOC's 8.52% return.

JULP

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: 0.51%
• 6M: 5.44%
• YTD: 6.29%
• 1Y: 13.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.86%

PQOC

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: 0.03%
• 6M: 7.77%
• YTD: 8.52%
• 1Y: 15.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.90%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
JULP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July	$451.20K	$497.16K	$328.07K
PQOC PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - October	$56.46K	$97.27K	$119.79K

JULP vs. PQOC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
JULP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July	6.29%	13.68%
PQOC PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - October	8.52%	14.67%

Correlation

The correlation between JULP and PQOC is 0.88, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2025	0.89

The correlation between JULP and PQOC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

JULP vs. PQOC — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

JULP

JULP Risk / Return Rank: 80
JULP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
JULP Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
JULP Omega Ratio Rank: 83
JULP Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
JULP Martin Ratio Rank: 90

PQOC

PQOC Risk / Return Rank: 70
PQOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
PQOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
PQOC Omega Ratio Rank: 71
PQOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
PQOC Martin Ratio Rank: 77

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

JULP vs. PQOC - 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 - October (PQOC). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	JULP	PQOC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	1.61	+0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.52	2.28	+0.24
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.30	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.72	2.22	+0.51
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.52	9.75	+4.77

JULP vs. PQOC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULP Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the PQOC Sharpe Ratio of 1.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULP and PQOC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

JULP vs. PQOC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULP drawdown since its inception was -12.36%, smaller than the maximum PQOC drawdown of -13.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULP and PQOC.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULP	PQOC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.36%	-13.71%	+1.35%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.47%	-6.68%	+2.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.33%	-0.85%	+0.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.03%	-1.53%	+0.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.84%	1.52%	-0.68%

Volatility

JULP vs. PQOC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - July (JULP) is 2.16%, while PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - October (PQOC) has a volatility of 2.82%. This indicates that JULP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PQOC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JULP	PQOC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.16%	2.82%	-0.66%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.85%	7.19%	-1.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.99%	9.17%	-2.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.72%	12.64%	-2.92%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.72%	12.64%	-2.92%

JULP vs. PQOC - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

JULP vs. PQOC - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULP nor PQOC has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULP and PQOC in my portfolio?

JULP and PQOC have a correlation of 0.88, 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 PQOC?

PQOC has higher volatility (2.82%) compared to JULP (2.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULP dropped -12.36% vs PQOC's -13.71%.

Which ETF is better, JULP or PQOC?

On 1-year performance, PQOC leads with 15.84% vs 13.03% for JULP. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, JULP has been the lower-risk option at 2.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JULP or PQOC?

Over the 1-year period, PQOC has performed better with a 15.84% return vs 13.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULP or PQOC?

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

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

JULP and PQOC have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

JULP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.61), 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.