PBAP vs. MRCP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PBAP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April) and MRCP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds from PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBAP returned 13.30% vs 18.03% for MRCP. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

PBAP vs. MRCP - 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 PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBAP achieves a 6.70% return, which is significantly lower than MRCP's 7.27% return.

PBAP

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

MRCP

• 1D: -0.22%
• 1M: 2.27%
• YTD: 7.27%
• 6M: 8.29%
• 1Y: 18.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBAP vs. MRCP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April	6.70%	6.34%	8.88%
MRCP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March	7.27%	14.13%	10.06%

Correlation

The correlation between PBAP and MRCP is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024	0.91

The correlation between PBAP and MRCP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBAP vs. MRCP — 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: 96
PBAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
PBAP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
PBAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
PBAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

MRCP

MRCP Risk / Return Rank: 87
MRCP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
MRCP Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
MRCP Omega Ratio Rank: 92
MRCP Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
MRCP Martin Ratio Rank: 91

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. MRCP - 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 PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP). 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.

	PBAP	MRCP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.29	2.91	+1.38
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.35	4.29	+3.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.15	1.61	+0.54
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.41	3.76	+7.65
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	82.09	21.57	+60.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PBAP vs. MRCP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBAP Sharpe Ratio is 4.29, which is higher than the MRCP Sharpe Ratio of 2.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBAP and MRCP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PBAP	MRCP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.29	2.91	+1.38
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.45	1.60	-0.16

Drawdowns

PBAP vs. MRCP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBAP drawdown since its inception was -9.70%, smaller than the maximum MRCP drawdown of -10.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBAP and MRCP.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBAP	MRCP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.70%	-10.73%	+1.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.17%	-4.81%	+3.64%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.13%	-0.22%	+0.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.79%	-0.77%	-0.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.16%	0.84%	-0.68%

Volatility

PBAP vs. MRCP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) is 0.59%, while PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - March (MRCP) has a volatility of 1.36%. This indicates that PBAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MRCP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBAP	MRCP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.59%	1.36%	-0.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.00%	4.95%	-2.95%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.12%	6.24%	-3.12%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.10%	9.27%	-2.17%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.10%	9.27%	-2.17%

PBAP vs. MRCP - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both PBAP and MRCP have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

PBAP vs. MRCP - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBAP nor MRCP has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBAP and MRCP in my portfolio?

PBAP and MRCP have a correlation of 0.85, 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 MRCP?

MRCP has higher volatility (1.36%) compared to PBAP (0.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBAP dropped -9.70% vs MRCP's -10.73%.

Which ETF is better, PBAP or MRCP?

On 1-year performance, MRCP leads with 18.03% vs 13.30% for PBAP. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, PBAP or MRCP?

Over the 1-year period, MRCP has performed better with a 18.03% return vs 13.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBAP or MRCP?

PBAP and MRCP have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

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

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.29 vs 2.91), 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.