PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PBAP vs. GFEB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PBAP vs. GFEB - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBAP achieves a 6.70% return, which is significantly higher than GFEB's 5.83% return.


PBAP

1D
-0.13%
1M
1.19%
YTD
6.70%
6M
7.49%
1Y
13.30%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

GFEB

1D
-0.21%
1M
1.89%
YTD
5.83%
6M
6.55%
1Y
15.17%
3Y*
13.04%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBAP vs. GFEB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between PBAP and GFEB is 0.83, 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

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024

0.85

The correlation between PBAP and GFEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.85 - 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

PBAP vs. GFEB — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBAP
PBAP Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
PBAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
PBAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank

GFEB
GFEB Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
GFEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
GFEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
GFEB Omega Ratio Rank: 8989
Omega Ratio Rank
GFEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
GFEB Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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.

PBAP vs. GFEB - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB). 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.


PBAPGFEBDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

4.29

2.77

+1.52

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

7.35

4.09

+3.25

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

2.15

1.56

+0.59

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

11.41

3.41

+7.99

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

82.09

18.40

+63.69

PBAP vs. GFEB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBAP Sharpe Ratio is 4.29, which is higher than the GFEB Sharpe Ratio of 2.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBAP and GFEB, 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


PBAPGFEBDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.29

2.77

+1.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.45

1.79

-0.34

Drawdowns

PBAP vs. GFEB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBAP drawdown since its inception was -9.70%, roughly equal to the maximum GFEB drawdown of -9.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBAP and GFEB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PBAPGFEBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.70%

-9.63%

-0.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.17%

-4.46%

+3.29%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-9.63%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.13%

-0.21%

+0.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.79%

-0.69%

-0.10%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.16%

0.83%

-0.67%

Volatility

PBAP vs. GFEB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) is 0.59%, while FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) has a volatility of 0.91%. This indicates that PBAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GFEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PBAPGFEBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.59%

0.91%

-0.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.00%

4.21%

-2.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.12%

5.51%

-2.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.10%

7.57%

-0.47%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

7.10%

7.57%

-0.47%

PBAP vs. GFEB - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GFEB's 0.85% expense ratio.


Dividends

PBAP vs. GFEB - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBAP nor GFEB has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


PBAP and GFEB have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

GFEB has higher volatility (0.91%) compared to PBAP (0.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBAP dropped -9.70% vs GFEB's -9.63%.

On 1-year performance, GFEB leads with 15.17% vs 13.30% for PBAP. On fees, PBAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, GFEB has performed better with a 15.17% return vs 13.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PBAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GFEB.

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

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBAP and 0.85% for GFEB.

PBAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.29 vs 2.77), 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 PBAP and GFEB

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