JULZ vs. PBFB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JULZ (Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF) and PBFB (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February) are both Options Trading funds. JULZ is passively managed, while PBFB is actively managed. Over the past year, JULZ returned 22.07% vs 13.63% for PBFB. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JULZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBFB.

Performance

JULZ vs. PBFB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULZ achieves a 8.79% return, which is significantly higher than PBFB's 4.68% return.

JULZ

• 1D: -0.52%
• 1M: 4.36%
• YTD: 8.79%
• 6M: 8.56%
• 1Y: 22.07%
• 3Y*: 16.86%
• 5Y*: 11.28%
• 10Y*: —

PBFB

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.70%
• YTD: 4.68%
• 6M: 5.66%
• 1Y: 13.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JULZ vs. PBFB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
JULZ Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF	8.79%	13.23%	16.29%
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	4.68%	9.86%	10.00%

Correlation

The correlation between JULZ and PBFB is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024	0.92

The correlation between JULZ and PBFB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

JULZ vs. PBFB — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULZ

JULZ Risk / Return Rank: 63
JULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
JULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
JULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 65
JULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
JULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 63

PBFB

PBFB Risk / Return Rank: 86
PBFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
PBFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
PBFB Omega Ratio Rank: 92
PBFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
PBFB Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

JULZ vs. PBFB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) 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.

	JULZ	PBFB	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	2.87	-0.71
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.03	4.27	-1.25
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.61	-0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.60	3.61	-1.01
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.36	19.17	-7.81
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JULZ vs. PBFB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is comparable to the PBFB Sharpe Ratio of 2.87. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULZ and PBFB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	JULZ	PBFB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.16	2.87	-0.71
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.15	1.67	-0.52

Drawdowns

JULZ vs. PBFB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULZ drawdown since its inception was -14.71%, which is greater than PBFB's maximum drawdown of -8.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULZ and PBFB.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULZ	PBFB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.71%	-8.65%	-6.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.53%	-3.79%	-4.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.71%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-14.71%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.52%	-0.15%	-0.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.98%	-0.60%	-2.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.95%	0.71%	+1.24%

Volatility

JULZ vs. PBFB - Volatility Comparison

Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) has a higher volatility of 2.61% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) at 0.75%. This indicates that JULZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBFB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JULZ	PBFB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.61%	0.75%	+1.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.05%	3.71%	+4.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.25%	4.77%	+5.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.19%	6.39%	+5.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.32%	6.39%	+5.93%

JULZ vs. PBFB - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than PBFB's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

JULZ vs. PBFB - Dividend Comparison

JULZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.00%, while PBFB has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
JULZ Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF	11.00%	11.96%	3.30%	3.59%	0.07%
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULZ and PBFB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, JULZ and PBFB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, JULZ or PBFB?

JULZ has higher volatility (2.61%) compared to PBFB (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULZ dropped -14.71% vs PBFB's -8.65%.

Which ETF is better, JULZ or PBFB?

On 1-year performance, JULZ leads with 22.07% vs 13.63% for PBFB. On fees, PBFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JULZ or PBFB?

Over the 1-year period, JULZ has performed better with a 22.07% return vs 13.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULZ or PBFB?

PBFB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JULZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JULZ or PBFB?

JULZ has the higher dividend yield at 11.00%, compared with 0.00% for PBFB.

What is the main difference between JULZ and PBFB?

They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for JULZ and 0.50% for PBFB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.16), 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.