MNA vs. PFRL

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

MNA (IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF) and PFRL (PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MNA is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the IQ Merger Arbitrage Index, while PFRL is a Bank Loan fund actively managed by PGIM. MNA is passively managed, while PFRL is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, MNA returned 5.95%/yr vs 8.62%/yr for PFRL. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MNA charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.72%/yr for PFRL.

Performance

MNA vs. PFRL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) and PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF (PFRL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MNA achieves a 1.79% return, which is significantly lower than PFRL's 1.96% return.

MNA

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: -0.14%
• YTD: 1.79%
• 6M: 1.97%
• 1Y: 4.47%
• 3Y*: 5.95%
• 5Y*: 1.83%
• 10Y*: 2.74%

PFRL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.48%
• YTD: 1.96%
• 6M: 2.68%
• 1Y: 6.12%
• 3Y*: 8.62%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MNA vs. PFRL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF	1.79%	8.59%	4.93%	0.18%	1.55%
PFRL PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF	1.96%	6.25%	9.40%	13.75%	1.27%

Correlation

The correlation between MNA and PFRL is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 25, 2022	0.23

MNA vs. PFRL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MNA	PFRL
Industrials	22.3%	97.9%
Utilities	15.3%	-
Financial Services	11.4%	-
Healthcare	11.3%	-
Basic Materials	10.3%	-
Communication Services	9.2%	88.1%
Technology	8.3%	-
Real Estate	5.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.4%	-
Consumer Cyclical	2.4%	-
Energy	-	11.9%

Return for Risk

MNA vs. PFRL — Risk / Return Rank

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

MNA

MNA Risk / Return Rank: 41
MNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
MNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
MNA Omega Ratio Rank: 28
MNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
MNA Martin Ratio Rank: 52

PFRL

PFRL Risk / Return Rank: 92
PFRL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
PFRL Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
PFRL Omega Ratio Rank: 95
PFRL Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
PFRL Martin Ratio Rank: 87

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.

MNA vs. PFRL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) and PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF (PFRL). 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.

	MNA	PFRL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.95	3.19	-2.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.41	4.59	-3.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	1.69	-0.52
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.22	4.90	-1.68
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.99	16.66	-8.67
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MNA vs. PFRL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MNA Sharpe Ratio is 0.95, which is lower than the PFRL Sharpe Ratio of 3.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MNA and PFRL, 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

	MNA	PFRL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95	3.19	-2.25
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.37	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.42	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.36	1.66	-1.30

Drawdowns

MNA vs. PFRL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MNA drawdown since its inception was -16.68%, which is greater than PFRL's maximum drawdown of -8.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNA and PFRL.

Drawdown Indicators

	MNA	PFRL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.68%	-8.83%	-7.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.40%	-1.25%	-0.15%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.01%	-8.83%	+5.82%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-10.45%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-16.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.55%	-0.05%	-0.50%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.83%	-0.44%	-2.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.56%	0.37%	+0.19%

Volatility

MNA vs. PFRL - Volatility Comparison

IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) has a higher volatility of 1.66% compared to PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF (PFRL) at 0.42%. This indicates that MNA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFRL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MNA	PFRL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.66%	0.42%	+1.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.59%	1.58%	+2.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.75%	1.93%	+2.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.98%	4.85%	+0.13%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.55%	4.85%	+1.70%

MNA vs. PFRL - Expense Ratio Comparison

MNA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is higher than PFRL's 0.72% expense ratio.

Dividends

MNA vs. PFRL - Dividend Comparison

MNA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PFRL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.83%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.20%	0.00%	0.00%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.21%	0.87%
PFRL PGIM Floating Rate Income ETF	6.83%	7.34%	8.96%	9.84%	3.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MNA and PFRL in my portfolio?

MNA and PFRL have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MNA or PFRL?

MNA has higher volatility (1.66%) compared to PFRL (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MNA dropped -16.68% vs PFRL's -8.83%.

Which ETF is better, MNA or PFRL?

On 3-year performance, PFRL leads with 8.62% vs 5.95% for MNA. On fees, PFRL is cheaper at 0.72% per year. On volatility, PFRL has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MNA or PFRL?

Over the 3-year period, PFRL has performed better with a 8.62% return vs 5.95%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MNA or PFRL?

PFRL is cheaper with a 0.72% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for MNA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MNA or PFRL?

PFRL has the higher dividend yield at 6.83%, compared with 0.00% for MNA.

What is the main difference between MNA and PFRL?

MNA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while PFRL is Bank Loan. They also come from different issuers: New York Life and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for MNA and 0.72% for PFRL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PFRL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 0.95), 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.