JULU vs. PMAP
JULU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF) and PMAP (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JULU returned 20.76% vs 7.15% for PMAP. Their correlation of 0.84 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JULU charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMAP.
Performance
JULU vs. PMAP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JULU achieves a 7.58% return, which is significantly higher than PMAP's 3.28% return.
JULU
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- -0.13%
- YTD
- 7.58%
- 6M
- 7.39%
- 1Y
- 20.76%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PMAP
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.13%
- YTD
- 3.28%
- 6M
- 3.40%
- 1Y
- 7.15%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
JULU vs. PMAP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
JULU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF | 7.58% | 16.46% |
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April | 3.28% | 5.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between JULU and PMAP 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 Apr 1, 2025 | 0.84 |
The correlation between JULU and PMAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.84 - 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
JULU vs. PMAP — Risk / Return Rank
JULU
PMAP
JULU vs. PMAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF (JULU) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). 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.
| JULU | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.09 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -9.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 2.79 | -1.42 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.96 | 20.61 | -17.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.73 | 111.28 | -99.55 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
JULU vs. PMAP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JULU drawdown since its inception was -12.46%, which is greater than PMAP's maximum drawdown of -1.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULU and PMAP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JULU | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.46% | -1.75% | -10.71% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.04% | -0.35% | -6.69% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.78% | -0.11% | -1.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.94% | -0.08% | -1.86% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.77% | 0.06% | +1.71% |
Volatility
JULU vs. PMAP - Volatility Comparison
AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Jul ETF (JULU) has a higher volatility of 4.60% compared to PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) at 0.41%. This indicates that JULU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JULU | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.60% | 0.41% | +4.19% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.31% | 0.89% | +7.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.40% | 1.18% | +9.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.64% | 2.31% | +9.33% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.64% | 2.31% | +9.33% |
JULU vs. PMAP - Expense Ratio Comparison
JULU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAP's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
JULU vs. PMAP - Dividend Comparison
Neither JULU nor PMAP has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
JULU and PMAP 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.
JULU has higher volatility (4.60%) compared to PMAP (0.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULU dropped -12.46% vs PMAP's -1.75%.
On 1-year performance, JULU leads with 20.76% vs 7.15% for PMAP. On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, JULU has performed better with a 20.76% return vs 7.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PMAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for JULU.
JULU and PMAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: Allianz and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for JULU and 0.50% for PMAP.
PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.10 vs 2.01), 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 JULU and PMAP
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