LCOW vs. PBFR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

LCOW (Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF) and PBFR (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LCOW is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats Index, while PBFR is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM. LCOW is passively managed, while PBFR is actively managed. Over the past year, LCOW returned 21.09% vs 12.83% for PBFR. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. LCOW charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBFR.

Performance

LCOW vs. PBFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LCOW achieves a 6.58% return, which is significantly higher than PBFR's 4.52% return.

LCOW

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 5.51%
• YTD: 6.58%
• 6M: 6.94%
• 1Y: 21.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PBFR

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 1.58%
• YTD: 4.52%
• 6M: 5.34%
• 1Y: 12.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LCOW vs. PBFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	6.58%	20.51%
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF	4.52%	11.46%

Correlation

The correlation between LCOW and PBFR is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 8, 2025	0.82

The correlation between LCOW and PBFR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

LCOW vs. PBFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

LCOW

LCOW Risk / Return Rank: 49
LCOW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
LCOW Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
LCOW Omega Ratio Rank: 49
LCOW Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
LCOW Martin Ratio Rank: 51

PBFR

PBFR Risk / Return Rank: 90
PBFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PBFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
PBFR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
PBFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
PBFR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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.

LCOW vs. PBFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). 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.

	LCOW	PBFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	2.99	-1.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.48	4.36	-1.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.66	-0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	4.57	-2.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.61	24.09	-15.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

LCOW vs. PBFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LCOW Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is lower than the PBFR Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LCOW and PBFR, 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

	LCOW	PBFR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.76	2.99	-1.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.15	1.54	+0.61

Drawdowns

LCOW vs. PBFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LCOW drawdown since its inception was -10.34%, which is greater than PBFR's maximum drawdown of -8.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LCOW and PBFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	LCOW	PBFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.34%	-8.50%	-1.84%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.34%	-2.82%	-7.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.55%	-0.16%	-0.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.38%	-0.63%	-0.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	0.53%	+1.93%

Volatility

LCOW vs. PBFR - Volatility Comparison

Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (LCOW) has a higher volatility of 2.29% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) at 0.64%. This indicates that LCOW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LCOW	PBFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.29%	0.64%	+1.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.17%	3.34%	+5.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.05%	4.33%	+7.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.32%	6.89%	+5.43%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.32%	6.89%	+5.43%

LCOW vs. PBFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

LCOW has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than PBFR's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

LCOW vs. PBFR - Dividend Comparison

LCOW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.50%, more than PBFR's 0.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
LCOW Pacer S&P 500 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF	0.50%	0.43%	0.00%
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LCOW and PBFR in my portfolio?

LCOW and PBFR have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, LCOW or PBFR?

LCOW has higher volatility (2.29%) compared to PBFR (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LCOW dropped -10.34% vs PBFR's -8.50%.

Which ETF is better, LCOW or PBFR?

On 1-year performance, LCOW leads with 21.09% vs 12.83% for PBFR. On fees, LCOW is cheaper at 0.49% per year. On volatility, PBFR has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LCOW or PBFR?

Over the 1-year period, LCOW has performed better with a 21.09% return vs 12.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LCOW or PBFR?

LCOW is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PBFR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LCOW or PBFR?

LCOW has the higher dividend yield at 0.50%, compared with 0.01% for PBFR.

What is the main difference between LCOW and PBFR?

LCOW is categorized as S&P 500, while PBFR is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Pacer and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for LCOW and 0.50% for PBFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 1.76), 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.