JULZ vs. PBMR
JULZ (Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF) and PBMR (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds. JULZ is passively managed, while PBMR is actively managed. Over the past year, JULZ returned 22.07% vs 13.20% for PBMR. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. JULZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBMR.
Performance
JULZ vs. PBMR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, JULZ achieves a 8.79% return, which is significantly higher than PBMR's 4.95% return.
JULZ
- 1D
- -0.52%
- 1M
- 4.36%
- YTD
- 8.79%
- 6M
- 8.56%
- 1Y
- 22.07%
- 3Y*
- 16.86%
- 5Y*
- 11.28%
- 10Y*
- —
PBMR
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- 1.44%
- YTD
- 4.95%
- 6M
- 5.91%
- 1Y
- 13.20%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
JULZ vs. PBMR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
JULZ Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF | 8.79% | 13.23% | 11.79% |
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March | 4.95% | 10.89% | 9.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between JULZ and PBMR 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 Mar 4, 2024 | 0.94 |
The correlation between JULZ and PBMR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - 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
JULZ vs. PBMR — Risk / Return Rank
JULZ
PBMR
JULZ vs. PBMR - 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 - March (PBMR). 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 | PBMR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.66 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.68 | -0.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.60 | 3.98 | -1.38 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.36 | 23.35 | -11.99 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| JULZ | PBMR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.16 | 3.08 | -0.91 |
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 | 1.73 | -0.57 |
Drawdowns
JULZ vs. PBMR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum JULZ drawdown since its inception was -14.71%, which is greater than PBMR's maximum drawdown of -7.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULZ and PBMR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| JULZ | PBMR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.71% | -7.64% | -7.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.53% | -3.33% | -5.20% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.71% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -14.71% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.52% | -0.25% | -0.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.98% | -0.51% | -2.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.95% | 0.57% | +1.38% |
Volatility
JULZ vs. PBMR - Volatility Comparison
Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) has a higher volatility of 2.61% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) at 0.77%. This indicates that JULZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBMR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| JULZ | PBMR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.61% | 0.77% | +1.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.05% | 3.39% | +4.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.25% | 4.31% | +5.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.19% | 6.60% | +5.59% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.32% | 6.60% | +5.72% |
JULZ vs. PBMR - Expense Ratio Comparison
JULZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than PBMR's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
JULZ vs. PBMR - Dividend Comparison
JULZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.00%, while PBMR 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% |
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, JULZ and PBMR 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.
JULZ has higher volatility (2.61%) compared to PBMR (0.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULZ dropped -14.71% vs PBMR's -7.64%.
On 1-year performance, JULZ leads with 22.07% vs 13.20% for PBMR. On fees, PBMR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBMR has been the lower-risk option at 0.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, JULZ has performed better with a 22.07% return vs 13.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PBMR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JULZ.
JULZ has the higher dividend yield at 11.00%, compared with 0.00% for PBMR.
They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for JULZ and 0.50% for PBMR.
PBMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.08 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.
Find the right allocation for JULZ and PBMR
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