MARM vs. PMJA
MARM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - March) and PMJA (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MARM returned 6.99% vs 7.51% for PMJA. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MARM charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMJA.
Performance
MARM vs. PMJA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MARM achieves a 3.21% return, which is significantly higher than PMJA's 2.36% return.
MARM
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.19%
- YTD
- 3.21%
- 6M
- 3.36%
- 1Y
- 6.99%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PMJA
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.24%
- YTD
- 2.36%
- 6M
- 2.49%
- 1Y
- 7.51%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MARM vs. PMJA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MARM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - March | 3.21% | 7.04% |
PMJA PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January | 2.36% | 6.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between MARM and PMJA is 0.70, 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 | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2025 | 0.75 |
The correlation between MARM and PMJA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.75 - 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
MARM vs. PMJA — Risk / Return Rank
MARM
PMJA
MARM vs. PMJA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - March (MARM) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January (PMJA). 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.
| MARM | PMJA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.63 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.08 | 1.84 | +0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 11.19 | 5.19 | +5.99 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 66.30 | 25.79 | +40.50 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MARM vs. PMJA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MARM drawdown since its inception was -2.74%, smaller than the maximum PMJA drawdown of -2.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARM and PMJA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MARM | PMJA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.74% | -2.98% | +0.24% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.63% | -1.45% | +0.82% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.13% | -0.13% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.20% | -0.33% | +0.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.11% | 0.29% | -0.18% |
Volatility
MARM vs. PMJA - Volatility Comparison
FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - March (MARM) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January (PMJA) have volatilities of 0.52% and 0.53%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MARM | PMJA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.52% | 0.53% | -0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.34% | 1.57% | -0.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.62% | 2.04% | -0.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.36% | 2.84% | +0.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.36% | 2.84% | +0.52% |
MARM vs. PMJA - Expense Ratio Comparison
MARM has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PMJA's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
MARM vs. PMJA - Dividend Comparison
Neither MARM nor PMJA has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
MARM and PMJA have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PMJA has higher volatility (0.53%) compared to MARM (0.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MARM dropped -2.74% vs PMJA's -2.98%.
On 1-year performance, PMJA leads with 7.51% vs 6.99% for MARM. On fees, PMJA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PMJA has performed better with a 7.51% return vs 6.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PMJA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for MARM.
MARM and PMJA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for MARM and 0.50% for PMJA.
MARM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.34 vs 3.71), 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 MARM and PMJA
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