PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JUNZ vs. PMAP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JUNZ vs. PMAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JUNZ achieves a 8.42% return, which is significantly higher than PMAP's 3.28% return.


JUNZ

1D
-0.40%
1M
4.04%
YTD
8.42%
6M
8.23%
1Y
21.10%
3Y*
16.22%
5Y*
9.84%
10Y*

PMAP

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.59%
YTD
3.28%
6M
3.83%
1Y
7.34%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JUNZ vs. PMAP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between JUNZ and PMAP is 0.88, 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

0.88

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025

0.86

The correlation between JUNZ and PMAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.88 - 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

JUNZ vs. PMAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

JUNZ
JUNZ Risk / Return Rank: 6161
Overall Rank
JUNZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JUNZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6464
Sortino Ratio Rank
JUNZ Omega Ratio Rank: 6363
Omega Ratio Rank
JUNZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5252
Calmar Ratio Rank
JUNZ Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

PMAP
PMAP Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
PMAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
PMAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
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.

JUNZ vs. PMAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) 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.


JUNZPMAPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-10.44

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.38

2.92

-1.54

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.56

21.40

-18.83

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.27

133.92

-122.64

JUNZ vs. PMAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JUNZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is lower than the PMAP Sharpe Ratio of 6.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JUNZ and PMAP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


JUNZPMAPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.12

6.43

-4.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.84

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.85

3.23

-2.38

Drawdowns

JUNZ vs. PMAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JUNZ drawdown since its inception was -17.88%, which is greater than PMAP's maximum drawdown of -1.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JUNZ and PMAP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JUNZPMAPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-17.88%

-1.75%

-16.13%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.27%

-0.34%

-7.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.06%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-17.88%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.40%

-0.06%

-0.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.27%

-0.08%

-4.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.88%

0.05%

+1.83%

Volatility

JUNZ vs. PMAP - Volatility Comparison

TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF (JUNZ) has a higher volatility of 2.45% compared to PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) at 0.27%. This indicates that JUNZ'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


JUNZPMAPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.45%

0.27%

+2.18%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.85%

0.81%

+7.04%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.01%

1.15%

+8.86%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.74%

2.33%

+9.41%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.73%

2.33%

+9.40%

JUNZ vs. PMAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

JUNZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAP's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

JUNZ vs. PMAP - Dividend Comparison

JUNZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, while PMAP has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021
JUNZ
TrueShares Structured Outcome (June) ETF
2.12%2.30%3.97%6.03%0.56%0.32%
PMAP
PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


JUNZ and PMAP have a correlation of 0.88, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

JUNZ has higher volatility (2.45%) compared to PMAP (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JUNZ dropped -17.88% vs PMAP's -1.75%.

On 1-year performance, JUNZ leads with 21.10% vs 7.34% for PMAP. On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, JUNZ has performed better with a 21.10% return vs 7.34%. 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 0.79% for JUNZ.

JUNZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.12%, compared with 0.00% for PMAP.

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

PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.43 vs 2.12), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for JUNZ 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