MJ vs. RB

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

MJ (ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF) and RB (ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MJ is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Prime Alternative Harvest Index, while RB is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Russell 2000. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, MJ returned 21.05% vs 18.24% for RB. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MJ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RB.

Performance

MJ vs. RB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF (MJ) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MJ achieves a -20.11% return, which is significantly lower than RB's 7.90% return.

MJ

• 1D: 0.98%
• 1M: -5.74%
• 6M: -21.83%
• YTD: -20.11%
• 1Y: 21.05%
• 3Y*: -10.46%
• 5Y*: -34.03%
• 10Y*: —

RB

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.02%
• 6M: 5.39%
• YTD: 7.90%
• 1Y: 18.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MJ vs. RB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MJ ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF	-20.11%	75.18%
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	7.90%	10.85%

Correlation

The correlation between MJ and RB is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.25
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.28

Return for Risk

MJ vs. RB — Risk / Return Rank

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

MJ

MJ Risk / Return Rank: 18
MJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
MJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
MJ Omega Ratio Rank: 23
MJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
MJ Martin Ratio Rank: 13

RB

RB Risk / Return Rank: 96
RB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
RB Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
RB Omega Ratio Rank: 95
RB Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
RB Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

MJ vs. RB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF (MJ) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). 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.

	MJ	RB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.24	2.79	-2.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.17	4.74	-3.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.61	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.43	8.77	-8.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.70	28.21	-27.50

MJ vs. RB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MJ Sharpe Ratio is 0.24, which is lower than the RB Sharpe Ratio of 2.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MJ and RB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MJ vs. RB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MJ drawdown since its inception was -96.55%, which is greater than RB's maximum drawdown of -2.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MJ and RB.

Drawdown Indicators

	MJ	RB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-96.55%	-2.09%	-94.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-48.66%	-2.09%	-46.57%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-69.73%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-92.00%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-94.84%	-0.54%	-94.30%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-69.53%	-0.44%	-69.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.08%	0.65%	+29.43%

Volatility

MJ vs. RB - Volatility Comparison

ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF (MJ) has a higher volatility of 11.45% compared to ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) at 1.54%. This indicates that MJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MJ	RB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.45%	1.54%	+9.91%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.73%	4.74%	+34.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	86.44%	6.57%	+79.87%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.05%	6.46%	+53.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	55.56%	6.46%	+49.10%

MJ vs. RB - Expense Ratio Comparison

MJ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than RB's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

MJ vs. RB - Dividend Comparison

MJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.48%, more than RB's 2.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
MJ ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF	2.48%	1.98%	13.80%
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	2.27%	1.78%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MJ and RB in my portfolio?

MJ and RB have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MJ or RB?

MJ has higher volatility (11.45%) compared to RB (1.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MJ dropped -96.55% vs RB's -2.09%.

Which ETF is better, MJ or RB?

On 1-year performance, MJ leads with 21.05% vs 18.24% for RB. On fees, RB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, RB has been the lower-risk option at 1.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MJ or RB?

Over the 1-year period, MJ has performed better with a 21.05% return vs 18.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MJ or RB?

RB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MJ or RB?

MJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.48%, compared with 2.27% for RB.

What is the main difference between MJ and RB?

MJ is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while RB is Defined Outcome. MJ tracks Prime Alternative Harvest Index, while RB tracks Russell 2000. They also come from different issuers: ETFMG and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for MJ and 0.58% for RB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 vs 0.24), 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.