MJ vs. RB
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. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MJ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RB.
Performance
MJ vs. RB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MJ achieves a -14.07% return, which is significantly lower than RB's 6.76% return.
MJ
- 1D
- -3.25%
- 1M
- -5.09%
- YTD
- -14.07%
- 6M
- 1.76%
- 1Y
- 40.95%
- 3Y*
- -7.86%
- 5Y*
- -35.31%
- 10Y*
- —
RB
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 1.63%
- YTD
- 6.76%
- 6M
- 8.48%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MJ vs. RB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MJ ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF | -14.07% | 71.61% |
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 6.76% | 10.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between MJ and RB is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 27, 2025 | 0.31 |
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
MJ vs. RB — Risk / Return Rank
MJ
RB
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.
| MJ | RB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 0.47 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 1.51 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.85 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.52 | — | — |
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
| MJ | RB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.59 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.48 | 3.15 | -3.63 |
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 -1.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MJ and RB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MJ | RB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -96.55% | -1.70% | -94.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -48.66% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -69.73% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -93.27% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.45% | -0.47% | -93.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -69.20% | -0.41% | -68.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 27.08% | — | — |
Volatility
MJ vs. RB - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MJ | RB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 11.92% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 59.46% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 86.70% | 6.21% | +80.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 59.89% | 6.21% | +53.68% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 55.74% | 6.21% | +49.53% |
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 2.31%, more than RB's 2.00% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
MJ ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF | 2.31% | 1.98% | 13.80% |
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF | 2.00% | 1.78% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MJ and RB have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, RB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
RB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MJ.
MJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.31%, compared with 2.00% for 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.
Find the right allocation for MJ and RB
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