PBAP vs. APRW

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PBAP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April) and APRW (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBAP returned 13.25% vs 12.48% for APRW. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for APRW.

Performance

PBAP vs. APRW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF (APRW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBAP achieves a 6.89% return, which is significantly higher than APRW's 6.25% return.

PBAP

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.44%
• YTD: 6.89%
• 6M: 7.09%
• 1Y: 13.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

APRW

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 6.25%
• 6M: 6.43%
• 1Y: 12.48%
• 3Y*: 9.95%
• 5Y*: 7.04%
• 10Y*: —

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

PBAP vs. APRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April	6.89%	6.34%	8.86%
APRW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF	6.25%	6.18%	8.49%

Correlation

The correlation between PBAP and APRW is 0.84, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2024	0.91

The correlation between PBAP and APRW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBAP vs. APRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBAP

PBAP Risk / Return Rank: 98
PBAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
PBAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
PBAP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
PBAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
PBAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

APRW

APRW Risk / Return Rank: 98
APRW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
APRW Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
APRW Omega Ratio Rank: 98
APRW Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
APRW Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

PBAP vs. APRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF (APRW). 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.

	PBAP	APRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.14	4.66	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.94	8.31	-1.37
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.10	2.18	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.36	14.03	-2.67
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	71.14	75.16	-4.03

PBAP vs. APRW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBAP Sharpe Ratio is 4.14, which is comparable to the APRW Sharpe Ratio of 4.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBAP and APRW, 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

PBAP vs. APRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBAP drawdown since its inception was -9.70%, roughly equal to the maximum APRW drawdown of -9.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBAP and APRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBAP	APRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.70%	-9.61%	-0.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.17%	-0.89%	-0.28%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.61%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-9.61%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	-0.16%	+0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.78%	-1.11%	+0.33%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.19%	0.17%	+0.02%

Volatility

PBAP vs. APRW - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) has a higher volatility of 1.18% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF (APRW) at 1.09%. This indicates that PBAP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APRW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBAP	APRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.18%	1.09%	+0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.29%	2.10%	+0.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.22%	2.69%	+0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.06%	6.73%	+0.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.06%	6.40%	+0.66%

PBAP vs. APRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than APRW's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBAP vs. APRW - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBAP nor APRW has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
APRW AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer20 Apr ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.67%
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBAP and APRW in my portfolio?

PBAP and APRW have a correlation of 0.84, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBAP or APRW?

PBAP has higher volatility (1.18%) compared to APRW (1.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBAP dropped -9.70% vs APRW's -9.61%.

Which ETF is better, PBAP or APRW?

On 1-year performance, PBAP leads with 13.25% vs 12.48% for APRW. On fees, PBAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBAP or APRW?

Over the 1-year period, PBAP has performed better with a 13.25% return vs 12.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBAP or APRW?

PBAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for APRW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBAP or APRW?

PBAP and APRW have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PBAP and APRW?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBAP and 0.74% for APRW.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

APRW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.66 vs 4.14), 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.