MSFO vs. FEBP

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

MSFO (YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF ) and FEBP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MSFO returned -16.63% vs 15.52% for FEBP. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MSFO charges 0.99%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for FEBP.

Performance

MSFO vs. FEBP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF (MSFO) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MSFO achieves a -14.86% return, which is significantly lower than FEBP's 7.42% return.

MSFO

• 1D: 1.17%
• 1M: 0.66%
• 6M: -10.69%
• YTD: -14.86%
• 1Y: -16.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEBP

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 0.53%
• 6M: 6.53%
• YTD: 7.42%
• 1Y: 15.52%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MSFO vs. FEBP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MSFO YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF	-14.86%	15.69%	5.78%
FEBP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February	7.42%	12.06%	11.40%

Correlation

The correlation between MSFO and FEBP is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	0.53

The correlation between MSFO and FEBP shifts across timeframes, from 0.39 (1 year) to 0.53 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MSFO vs. FEBP — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSFO

MSFO Risk / Return Rank: 4
MSFO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
MSFO Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
MSFO Omega Ratio Rank: 4
MSFO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
MSFO Martin Ratio Rank: 4

FEBP

FEBP Risk / Return Rank: 68
FEBP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
FEBP Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
FEBP Omega Ratio Rank: 82
FEBP Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
FEBP Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

MSFO vs. FEBP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF (MSFO) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). 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.

	MSFO	FEBP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.71	1.48	-2.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.88	2.18	-3.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.89	1.39	-0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.56	2.53	-3.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.08	13.55	-14.63

MSFO vs. FEBP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSFO Sharpe Ratio is -0.71, which is lower than the FEBP Sharpe Ratio of 1.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSFO and FEBP, 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

MSFO vs. FEBP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSFO drawdown since its inception was -29.65%, which is greater than FEBP's maximum drawdown of -12.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFO and FEBP.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSFO	FEBP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.65%	-12.11%	-17.54%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.65%	-6.16%	-23.49%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.98%	-0.21%	-21.77%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.24%	-0.91%	-6.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.46%	1.15%	+14.31%

Volatility

MSFO vs. FEBP - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF (MSFO) has a higher volatility of 9.03% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) at 8.11%. This indicates that MSFO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FEBP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MSFO	FEBP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.03%	8.11%	+0.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.05%	9.72%	+11.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.49%	10.53%	+12.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.23%	10.23%	+10.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.23%	10.23%	+10.00%

MSFO vs. FEBP - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSFO has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is higher than FEBP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSFO vs. FEBP - Dividend Comparison

MSFO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 42.89%, while FEBP has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
FEBP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MSFO YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF	42.89%	33.91%	35.15%	6.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSFO and FEBP in my portfolio?

MSFO and FEBP have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MSFO or FEBP?

MSFO has higher volatility (9.03%) compared to FEBP (8.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSFO dropped -29.65% vs FEBP's -12.11%.

Which ETF is better, MSFO or FEBP?

On 1-year performance, FEBP leads with 15.52% vs -16.63% for MSFO. On fees, FEBP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, FEBP has been the lower-risk option at 8.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MSFO or FEBP?

Over the 1-year period, FEBP has performed better with a 15.52% return vs -16.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSFO or FEBP?

FEBP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for MSFO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MSFO or FEBP?

MSFO has the higher dividend yield at 42.89%, compared with 0.00% for FEBP.

What is the main difference between MSFO and FEBP?

They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for MSFO and 0.50% for FEBP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FEBP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs -0.71), 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.