MARU vs. PMFB

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MARU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF) and PMFB (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February) are both Defined Outcome funds. MARU is passively managed, while PMFB is actively managed. Over the past year, MARU returned 19.61% vs 8.06% for PMFB. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MARU charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMFB.

Performance

MARU vs. PMFB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF (MARU) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MARU achieves a 7.88% return, which is significantly higher than PMFB's 2.56% return.

MARU

• 1D: -0.52%
• 1M: 4.24%
• YTD: 7.88%
• 6M: 7.09%
• 1Y: 19.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PMFB

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.80%
• YTD: 2.56%
• 6M: 3.26%
• 1Y: 8.06%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MARU vs. PMFB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MARU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF	7.88%	12.53%
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February	2.56%	6.59%

Correlation

The correlation between MARU and PMFB 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 Mar 4, 2025	0.88

The correlation between MARU and PMFB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MARU vs. PMFB — Risk / Return Rank

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

MARU

MARU Risk / Return Rank: 61
MARU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
MARU Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
MARU Omega Ratio Rank: 61
MARU Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
MARU Martin Ratio Rank: 64

PMFB

PMFB Risk / Return Rank: 95
PMFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
PMFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
PMFB Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

MARU vs. PMFB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF (MARU) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB). 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.

	MARU	PMFB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.01	3.83	-1.82
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.77	6.15	-3.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.88	-0.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.00	6.04	-3.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.51	31.52	-20.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MARU vs. PMFB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MARU Sharpe Ratio is 2.01, which is lower than the PMFB Sharpe Ratio of 3.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MARU and PMFB, 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

	MARU	PMFB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.01	3.83	-1.82
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.43	2.43	-1.01

Drawdowns

MARU vs. PMFB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MARU drawdown since its inception was -8.50%, which is greater than PMFB's maximum drawdown of -2.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARU and PMFB.

Drawdown Indicators

	MARU	PMFB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.50%	-2.94%	-5.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.56%	-1.34%	-5.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.52%	-0.06%	-0.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.34%	-0.37%	-0.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.71%	0.26%	+1.45%

Volatility

MARU vs. PMFB - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF (MARU) has a higher volatility of 2.44% compared to PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) at 0.37%. This indicates that MARU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMFB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MARU	PMFB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.44%	0.37%	+2.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.47%	1.43%	+6.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.81%	2.12%	+7.69%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.78%	2.77%	+9.01%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.78%	2.77%	+9.01%

MARU vs. PMFB - Expense Ratio Comparison

MARU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than PMFB's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

MARU vs. PMFB - Dividend Comparison

Neither MARU nor PMFB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MARU and PMFB in my portfolio?

MARU and PMFB 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.

Which is riskier, MARU or PMFB?

MARU has higher volatility (2.44%) compared to PMFB (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MARU dropped -8.50% vs PMFB's -2.94%.

Which ETF is better, MARU or PMFB?

On 1-year performance, MARU leads with 19.61% vs 8.06% for PMFB. On fees, PMFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MARU or PMFB?

Over the 1-year period, MARU has performed better with a 19.61% return vs 8.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MARU or PMFB?

PMFB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for MARU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MARU or PMFB?

MARU and PMFB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between MARU and PMFB?

They also come from different issuers: AllianzIM and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for MARU and 0.50% for PMFB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.83 vs 2.01), 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.