MARU vs. PMJN
MARU (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF) and PMJN (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June) are both Defined Outcome funds. MARU is passively managed, while PMJN is actively managed. Over the past year, MARU returned 20.79% vs 6.77% for PMJN. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. MARU charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMJN.
Performance
MARU vs. PMJN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MARU achieves a 8.44% return, which is significantly higher than PMJN's 2.45% return.
MARU
- 1D
- 0.17%
- 1M
- 4.35%
- YTD
- 8.44%
- 6M
- 8.52%
- 1Y
- 20.79%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PMJN
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.49%
- YTD
- 2.45%
- 6M
- 3.05%
- 1Y
- 6.77%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MARU vs. PMJN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MARU AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 Uncapped Mar ETF | 8.44% | 11.39% |
PMJN PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June | 2.45% | 4.21% |
Correlation
The correlation between MARU and PMJN is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2025 | 0.85 |
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
MARU vs. PMJN — Risk / Return Rank
MARU
PMJN
MARU vs. PMJN - 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 - June (PMJN). 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 | PMJN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.13 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.92 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.20 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.28 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MARU | PMJN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.13 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.47 | 3.90 | -2.43 |
Drawdowns
MARU vs. PMJN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MARU drawdown since its inception was -8.50%, which is greater than PMJN's maximum drawdown of -1.15%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MARU and PMJN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MARU | PMJN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.50% | -1.15% | -7.35% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.56% | -1.15% | -5.41% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.34% | -0.08% | -1.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.71% | — | — |
Volatility
MARU vs. PMJN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MARU | PMJN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.41% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.46% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.79% | 1.74% | +8.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.78% | 1.74% | +10.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.78% | 1.74% | +10.04% |
MARU vs. PMJN - Expense Ratio Comparison
MARU has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than PMJN's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
MARU vs. PMJN - Dividend Comparison
Neither MARU nor PMJN has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
MARU and PMJN have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On 1-year performance, MARU leads with 20.79% vs 6.77% for PMJN. On fees, PMJN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, MARU has performed better with a 20.79% return vs 6.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PMJN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for MARU.
MARU and PMJN have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: AllianzIM and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for MARU and 0.50% for PMJN.
Find the right allocation for MARU and PMJN
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