MART vs. APRP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MART (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF) and APRP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MART returned 19.86% vs 17.90% for APRP. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MART charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for APRP.

Performance

MART vs. APRP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MART achieves a 8.18% return, which is significantly lower than APRP's 9.34% return.

MART

• 1D: -0.24%
• 1M: 2.60%
• YTD: 8.18%
• 6M: 9.29%
• 1Y: 19.86%
• 3Y*: 16.35%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

APRP

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 1.87%
• YTD: 9.34%
• 6M: 10.32%
• 1Y: 17.90%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MART vs. APRP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MART Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF	8.18%	14.93%	10.50%
APRP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April	9.34%	7.80%	10.28%

Correlation

The correlation between MART and APRP 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 Apr 2, 2024	0.94

The correlation between MART and APRP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MART vs. APRP — Risk / Return Rank

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

MART

MART Risk / Return Rank: 86
MART Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
MART Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
MART Omega Ratio Rank: 90
MART Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
MART Martin Ratio Rank: 90

APRP

APRP Risk / Return Rank: 98
APRP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
APRP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
APRP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
APRP Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
APRP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

MART vs. APRP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP). 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.

	MART	APRP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.82	4.15	-1.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.16	7.11	-2.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.59	2.04	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.76	16.51	-12.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.14	73.52	-52.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MART vs. APRP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MART Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is lower than the APRP Sharpe Ratio of 4.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MART and APRP, 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

	MART	APRP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.82	4.15	-1.33
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.79	1.36	+0.43

Drawdowns

MART vs. APRP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MART drawdown since its inception was -11.61%, smaller than the maximum APRP drawdown of -13.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MART and APRP.

Drawdown Indicators

	MART	APRP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.61%	-13.66%	+2.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.30%	-1.09%	-4.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.61%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.33%	-0.19%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.90%	-1.23%	+0.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.94%	0.24%	+0.70%

Volatility

MART vs. APRP - Volatility Comparison

Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Mar ETF (MART) has a higher volatility of 1.31% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP) at 1.16%. This indicates that MART's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APRP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MART	APRP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.31%	1.16%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.60%	3.37%	+2.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.07%	4.33%	+2.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.69%	9.49%	+0.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.69%	9.49%	+0.20%

MART vs. APRP - Expense Ratio Comparison

MART has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than APRP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

MART vs. APRP - Dividend Comparison

Neither MART nor APRP has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MART and APRP in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, MART and APRP 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.

Which is riskier, MART or APRP?

MART has higher volatility (1.31%) compared to APRP (1.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MART dropped -11.61% vs APRP's -13.66%.

Which ETF is better, MART or APRP?

On 1-year performance, MART leads with 19.86% vs 17.90% for APRP. On fees, APRP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, APRP has been the lower-risk option at 1.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MART or APRP?

Over the 1-year period, MART has performed better with a 19.86% return vs 17.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MART or APRP?

APRP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for MART.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MART or APRP?

MART and APRP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between MART and APRP?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for MART and 0.50% for APRP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

APRP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.15 vs 2.82), 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.