PBAP vs. XMAR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PBAP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April) and XMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBAP returned 12.34% vs 12.10% for XMAR. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for XMAR.

Performance

PBAP vs. XMAR - 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 Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR). 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 PBAP having a 6.49% return and XMAR slightly lower at 6.44%.

PBAP

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 0.06%
• YTD: 6.49%
• 6M: 6.58%
• 1Y: 12.34%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XMAR

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 6.44%
• 6M: 6.54%
• 1Y: 12.10%
• 3Y*: 10.80%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBAP vs. XMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April	6.49%	6.34%	8.86%
XMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March	6.44%	10.30%	7.67%

Correlation

The correlation between PBAP and XMAR is 0.80, 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2024	0.85

The correlation between PBAP and XMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBAP vs. XMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBAP

PBAP Risk / Return Rank: 97
PBAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
PBAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PBAP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
PBAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
PBAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

XMAR

XMAR Risk / Return Rank: 97
XMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
XMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
XMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
XMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
XMAR 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. XMAR - 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 Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR). 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	XMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.86	3.98	-0.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	6.36	6.68	-0.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.00	2.06	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.58	8.22	+2.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	65.60	56.87	+8.73

PBAP vs. XMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBAP Sharpe Ratio is 3.86, which is comparable to the XMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBAP and XMAR, 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. XMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBAP drawdown since its inception was -9.70%, which is greater than XMAR's maximum drawdown of -7.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBAP and XMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBAP	XMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.70%	-7.29%	-2.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.17%	-1.48%	+0.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-7.29%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.42%	-0.42%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.78%	-0.30%	-0.48%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.19%	0.21%	-0.02%

Volatility

PBAP vs. XMAR - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) has a higher volatility of 1.25% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) at 1.08%. This indicates that PBAP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBAP	XMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.25%	1.08%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.33%	2.61%	-0.28%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.24%	3.07%	+0.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.06%	5.54%	+1.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.06%	5.54%	+1.52%

PBAP vs. XMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

PBAP vs. XMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBAP nor XMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBAP and XMAR in my portfolio?

PBAP and XMAR have a correlation of 0.80, 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 XMAR?

PBAP has higher volatility (1.25%) compared to XMAR (1.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBAP dropped -9.70% vs XMAR's -7.29%.

Which ETF is better, PBAP or XMAR?

On 1-year performance, PBAP leads with 12.34% vs 12.10% for XMAR. On fees, PBAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, XMAR has been the lower-risk option at 1.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBAP or XMAR?

Over the 1-year period, PBAP has performed better with a 12.34% return vs 12.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBAP or XMAR?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between PBAP and XMAR?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.98 vs 3.86), 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.