PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JULW vs. PBFB
Performance
Return for Risk
Dividends
Drawdowns
Volatility

Performance

JULW vs. PBFB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

JULW vs. PBFB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
JULW
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF
-0.44%11.57%10.58%
PBFB
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February
-0.93%9.86%10.00%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULW achieves a -0.44% return, which is significantly higher than PBFB's -0.93% return.


JULW

1D
0.36%
1M
-1.13%
YTD
-0.44%
6M
1.29%
1Y
12.72%
3Y*
11.46%
5Y*
8.13%
10Y*

PBFB

1D
0.40%
1M
-1.63%
YTD
-0.93%
6M
1.48%
1Y
10.80%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


JULW vs. PBFB - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULW has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than PBFB's 0.50% expense ratio.


Return for Risk

JULW vs. PBFB — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULW
JULW Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
JULW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JULW Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
JULW Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
JULW Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
JULW Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

PBFB
PBFB Risk / Return Rank: 7272
Overall Rank
PBFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7373
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBFB Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
PBFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBFB Martin Ratio Rank: 7979
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.

JULW vs. PBFB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB). 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.


JULWPBFBDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.47

1.30

+0.17

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.26

1.95

+0.31

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

1.33

+0.05

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

2.01

1.76

+0.25

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

11.75

9.68

+2.06

JULW vs. PBFB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULW Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is comparable to the PBFB Sharpe Ratio of 1.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULW and PBFB, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


JULWPBFBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.47

1.30

+0.17

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

1.19

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.30

1.34

-0.04

Correlation

The correlation between JULW and PBFB is 0.88, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.


Dividends

JULW vs. PBFB - Dividend Comparison

Neither JULW nor PBFB has paid dividends to shareholders.


TTM202520242023202220212020
JULW
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%3.04%
PBFB
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Drawdowns

JULW vs. PBFB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULW drawdown since its inception was -9.49%, which is greater than PBFB's maximum drawdown of -8.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULW and PBFB.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


JULWPBFBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.49%

-8.65%

-0.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.47%

-6.16%

-0.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-9.49%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.37%

-2.08%

+0.71%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.94%

-0.63%

-0.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.11%

1.12%

-0.01%

Volatility

JULW vs. PBFB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Jul ETF (JULW) is 2.41%, while PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) has a volatility of 2.56%. This indicates that JULW experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBFB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


JULWPBFBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.41%

2.56%

-0.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.45%

3.81%

-0.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

8.67%

8.32%

+0.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.86%

6.54%

+0.32%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.61%

6.54%

+0.07%