PAB vs. PJFG

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

PAB (PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF) and PJFG (PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PAB is a Intermediate Core Bond fund actively managed by PGIM, while PJFG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PAB returned 4.61%/yr vs 20.87%/yr for PJFG. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PAB charges 0.19%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for PJFG.

Performance

PAB vs. PJFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB) and PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF (PJFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with PAB having a 0.92% return and PJFG slightly lower at 0.89%.

PAB

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 1.16%
• YTD: 0.92%
• 6M: 0.83%
• 1Y: 4.71%
• 3Y*: 4.61%
• 5Y*: 0.27%
• 10Y*: —

PJFG

• 1D: -0.46%
• 1M: -3.64%
• YTD: 0.89%
• 6M: -0.39%
• 1Y: 11.00%
• 3Y*: 20.87%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PAB vs. PJFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	0.92%	7.55%	1.89%	6.37%	-2.04%
PJFG PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF	0.89%	16.94%	31.59%	54.23%	-7.56%

Correlation

The correlation between PAB and PJFG is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.15
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2022	0.14

The correlation between PAB and PJFG shifts across timeframes, from 0.14 (all time) to 0.27 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PAB vs. PJFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PAB

PAB Risk / Return Rank: 37
PAB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 38
PAB Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
PAB Omega Ratio Rank: 36
PAB Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
PAB Martin Ratio Rank: 34

PJFG

PJFG Risk / Return Rank: 18
PJFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
PJFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
PJFG Omega Ratio Rank: 18
PJFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 16
PJFG Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

PAB vs. PJFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB) and PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF (PJFG). 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.

	PAB	PJFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	0.63	+0.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	0.96	+0.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.12	+0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.65	0.58	+1.07
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.67	1.78	+2.88

PAB vs. PJFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PAB Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is higher than the PJFG Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PAB and PJFG, 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

PAB vs. PJFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PAB drawdown since its inception was -19.27%, smaller than the maximum PJFG drawdown of -24.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAB and PJFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PAB	PJFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.27%	-24.24%	+4.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.86%	-19.00%	+16.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.95%	-24.24%	+18.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.27%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-7.44%	+6.47%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.76%	-3.79%	-3.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.01%	6.18%	-5.17%

Volatility

PAB vs. PJFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF (PAB) is 1.27%, while PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF (PJFG) has a volatility of 6.88%. This indicates that PAB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PJFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PAB	PJFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.27%	6.88%	-5.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.91%	13.93%	-11.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.85%	17.73%	-13.88%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.23%	20.98%	-14.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.14%	20.98%	-14.84%

PAB vs. PJFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PAB has a 0.19% expense ratio, which is lower than PJFG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

PAB vs. PJFG - Dividend Comparison

PAB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.53%, while PJFG has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PAB PGIM Active Aggregate Bond ETF	4.53%	4.28%	4.25%	3.70%	2.81%	2.34%
PJFG PGIM Jennison Focused Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PAB and PJFG in my portfolio?

PAB and PJFG have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PAB or PJFG?

PJFG has higher volatility (6.88%) compared to PAB (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAB dropped -19.27% vs PJFG's -24.24%.

Which ETF is better, PAB or PJFG?

On 3-year performance, PJFG leads with 20.87% vs 4.61% for PAB. On fees, PAB is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, PAB has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PAB or PJFG?

Over the 3-year period, PJFG has performed better with a 20.87% return vs 4.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PAB or PJFG?

PAB is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for PJFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PAB or PJFG?

PAB has the higher dividend yield at 4.53%, compared with 0.00% for PJFG.

What is the main difference between PAB and PJFG?

PAB is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while PJFG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.19% for PAB and 0.75% for PJFG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PAB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.23 vs 0.62), 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.