PBAP vs. JULZ

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

PBAP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April) and JULZ (Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF) are both Options Trading funds. PBAP is actively managed, while JULZ is passively managed. Over the past year, PBAP returned 12.15% vs 16.34% for JULZ. Their correlation of 0.88 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for JULZ.

Performance

PBAP vs. JULZ - 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 Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBAP achieves a 7.44% return, which is significantly lower than JULZ's 8.20% return.

PBAP

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 0.87%
• 6M: 7.15%
• YTD: 7.44%
• 1Y: 12.15%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JULZ

• 1D: 0.47%
• 1M: 1.13%
• 6M: 6.76%
• YTD: 8.20%
• 1Y: 16.34%
• 3Y*: 15.12%
• 5Y*: 10.62%
• 10Y*: —

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

PBAP vs. JULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April	7.44%	6.34%	8.86%
JULZ Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF	8.20%	13.23%	9.57%

Correlation

The correlation between PBAP and JULZ is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2024	0.88

The correlation between PBAP and JULZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBAP vs. JULZ — 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

JULZ

JULZ Risk / Return Rank: 53
JULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
JULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
JULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 54
JULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 46
JULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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. JULZ - 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 Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ). 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	JULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.73	1.51	+2.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.18	2.12	+4.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.95	1.27	+0.68
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.42	1.92	+8.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	62.42	7.91	+54.51

PBAP vs. JULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBAP Sharpe Ratio is 3.73, which is higher than the JULZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBAP and JULZ, 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. JULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBAP drawdown since its inception was -9.70%, smaller than the maximum JULZ drawdown of -14.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBAP and JULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBAP	JULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.70%	-14.71%	+5.01%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.17%	-8.53%	+7.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.71%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-14.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.01%	-1.07%	+1.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.76%	-2.96%	+2.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.20%	2.07%	-1.87%

Volatility

PBAP vs. JULZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) is 1.14%, while Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) has a volatility of 3.56%. This indicates that PBAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JULZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBAP	JULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.14%	3.56%	-2.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.44%	8.99%	-6.55%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.27%	10.90%	-7.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.99%	12.33%	-5.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.99%	12.34%	-5.35%

PBAP vs. JULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than JULZ's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBAP vs. JULZ - Dividend Comparison

PBAP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while JULZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.06%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
JULZ Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF	11.06%	11.96%	3.30%	3.59%	0.07%
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBAP and JULZ in my portfolio?

PBAP and JULZ have a correlation of 0.81, 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 JULZ?

JULZ has higher volatility (3.56%) compared to PBAP (1.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBAP dropped -9.70% vs JULZ's -14.71%.

Which ETF is better, PBAP or JULZ?

On 1-year performance, JULZ leads with 16.34% vs 12.15% for PBAP. On fees, PBAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBAP has been the lower-risk option at 1.14%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBAP or JULZ?

Over the 1-year period, JULZ has performed better with a 16.34% return vs 12.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBAP or JULZ?

PBAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JULZ.

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

JULZ has the higher dividend yield at 11.06%, compared with 0.00% for PBAP.

What is the main difference between PBAP and JULZ?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and TrueShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBAP and 0.79% for JULZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.73 vs 1.51), 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.