PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MRCP vs. JULJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MRCP vs. JULJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP) and Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MRCP achieves a 7.27% return, which is significantly higher than JULJ's 1.82% return.


MRCP

1D
-0.22%
1M
2.27%
YTD
7.27%
6M
8.29%
1Y
18.03%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

JULJ

1D
-0.02%
1M
0.28%
YTD
1.82%
6M
2.32%
1Y
5.56%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MRCP vs. JULJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MRCP
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March
7.27%14.13%11.42%
JULJ
Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July
1.82%5.91%4.91%

Correlation

The correlation between MRCP and JULJ is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.68

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2024

0.68

The correlation between MRCP and JULJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

MRCP vs. JULJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

MRCP
MRCP Risk / Return Rank: 8787
Overall Rank
MRCP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MRCP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
MRCP Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
MRCP Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
MRCP Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank

JULJ
JULJ Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
JULJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JULJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
JULJ Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
JULJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
JULJ Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

MRCP vs. JULJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP) and Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ). 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.


MRCPJULJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.76

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

1.88

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.76

9.21

-5.45

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

21.57

47.78

-26.21

MRCP vs. JULJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MRCP Sharpe Ratio is 2.91, which is comparable to the JULJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MRCP and JULJ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MRCPJULJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.91

3.62

-0.72

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.60

1.96

-0.36

Drawdowns

MRCP vs. JULJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MRCP drawdown since its inception was -10.73%, which is greater than JULJ's maximum drawdown of -3.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MRCP and JULJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MRCPJULJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.73%

-3.62%

-7.11%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.81%

-0.61%

-4.20%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.22%

-0.02%

-0.20%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.77%

-0.10%

-0.67%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.84%

0.12%

+0.72%

Volatility

MRCP vs. JULJ - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP) has a higher volatility of 1.36% compared to Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ) at 0.17%. This indicates that MRCP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than JULJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MRCPJULJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.36%

0.17%

+1.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.95%

0.94%

+4.01%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.24%

1.54%

+4.70%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.27%

3.08%

+6.19%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.27%

3.08%

+6.19%

MRCP vs. JULJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

MRCP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than JULJ's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

MRCP vs. JULJ - Dividend Comparison

MRCP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while JULJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.66%.


PositionTTM202520242023
JULJ
Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July
5.66%5.76%5.96%3.21%
MRCP
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MRCP and JULJ have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MRCP has higher volatility (1.36%) compared to JULJ (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MRCP dropped -10.73% vs JULJ's -3.62%.

On 1-year performance, MRCP leads with 18.03% vs 5.56% for JULJ. On fees, MRCP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, JULJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, MRCP has performed better with a 18.03% return vs 5.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MRCP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JULJ.

JULJ has the higher dividend yield at 5.66%, compared with 0.00% for MRCP.

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MRCP and 0.79% for JULJ.

JULJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.62 vs 2.91), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MRCP and JULJ

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