JUNP vs. QB

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

JUNP (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - June) and QB (ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. JUNP is actively managed, while QB is passively managed. Over the past year, JUNP returned 9.84% vs 18.28% for QB. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JUNP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for QB.

Performance

JUNP vs. QB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - June (JUNP) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JUNP achieves a 3.73% return, which is significantly lower than QB's 12.15% return.

JUNP

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 0.84%
• 6M: 3.06%
• YTD: 3.73%
• 1Y: 9.84%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QB

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 3.02%
• 6M: 10.85%
• YTD: 12.15%
• 1Y: 18.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JUNP vs. QB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
JUNP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - June	3.73%	7.37%
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	12.15%	6.10%

Correlation

The correlation between JUNP and QB is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.70

The correlation between JUNP and QB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

JUNP vs. QB — Risk / Return Rank

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

JUNP

JUNP Risk / Return Rank: 53
JUNP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
JUNP Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
JUNP Omega Ratio Rank: 64
JUNP Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
JUNP Martin Ratio Rank: 81

QB

QB Risk / Return Rank: 94
QB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
QB Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
QB Omega Ratio Rank: 95
QB Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
QB Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

JUNP vs. QB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - June (JUNP) and ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB). 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.

	JUNP	QB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.12	2.62	-1.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.70	3.81	-2.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.62	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.70	5.28	-3.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.52	25.48	-12.96

JUNP vs. QB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JUNP Sharpe Ratio is 1.12, which is lower than the QB Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JUNP and QB, 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

JUNP vs. QB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JUNP drawdown since its inception was -11.23%, which is greater than QB's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JUNP and QB.

Drawdown Indicators

	JUNP	QB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.23%	-3.47%	-7.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.81%	-3.47%	-2.34%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.44%	-0.31%	-0.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.90%	-0.42%	-0.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.79%	0.72%	+0.07%

Volatility

JUNP vs. QB - Volatility Comparison

PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - June (JUNP) has a higher volatility of 7.05% compared to ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (QB) at 3.05%. This indicates that JUNP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JUNP	QB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.05%	3.05%	+4.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.20%	5.83%	+2.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.81%	7.03%	+1.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.39%	6.93%	+3.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.39%	6.93%	+3.46%

JUNP vs. QB - Expense Ratio Comparison

JUNP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than QB's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

JUNP vs. QB - Dividend Comparison

JUNP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while QB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.78%.

Position	TTM	2025
JUNP PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF - June	0.00%	0.00%
QB ProShares Nasdaq-100 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	0.78%	0.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JUNP and QB in my portfolio?

JUNP and QB have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JUNP or QB?

JUNP has higher volatility (7.05%) compared to QB (3.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JUNP dropped -11.23% vs QB's -3.47%.

Which ETF is better, JUNP or QB?

On 1-year performance, QB leads with 18.28% vs 9.84% for JUNP. On fees, JUNP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QB has been the lower-risk option at 3.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JUNP or QB?

Over the 1-year period, QB has performed better with a 18.28% return vs 9.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JUNP or QB?

JUNP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for QB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JUNP or QB?

QB has the higher dividend yield at 0.78%, compared with 0.00% for JUNP.

What is the main difference between JUNP and QB?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for JUNP and 0.58% for QB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

QB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.62 vs 1.12), 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.