PBFB vs. APLY

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

PBFB (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February) and APLY (YieldMax AAPL Option Income Strategy ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBFB returned 11.53% vs 38.17% for APLY. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PBFB charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for APLY.

Performance

PBFB vs. APLY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) and YieldMax AAPL Option Income Strategy ETF (APLY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBFB achieves a 5.35% return, which is significantly lower than APLY's 14.78% return.

PBFB

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 0.53%
• 6M: 4.82%
• YTD: 5.35%
• 1Y: 11.53%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

APLY

• 1D: 1.28%
• 1M: 8.89%
• 6M: 19.82%
• YTD: 14.78%
• 1Y: 38.17%
• 3Y*: 11.40%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBFB vs. APLY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	5.35%	9.86%	8.58%
APLY YieldMax AAPL Option Income Strategy ETF	14.78%	4.69%	22.73%

Correlation

The correlation between PBFB and APLY is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	0.47

Return for Risk

PBFB vs. APLY — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBFB

PBFB Risk / Return Rank: 88
PBFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
PBFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
PBFB Omega Ratio Rank: 92
PBFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
PBFB Martin Ratio Rank: 90

APLY

APLY Risk / Return Rank: 72
APLY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
APLY Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
APLY Omega Ratio Rank: 79
APLY Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
APLY 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.

PBFB vs. APLY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) and YieldMax AAPL Option Income Strategy ETF (APLY). 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.

	PBFB	APLY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	1.92	+0.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.53	2.58	+0.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.37	+0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.06	3.26	-0.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.90	7.84	+8.07

PBFB vs. APLY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBFB Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is comparable to the APLY Sharpe Ratio of 1.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBFB and APLY, 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

PBFB vs. APLY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBFB drawdown since its inception was -8.65%, smaller than the maximum APLY drawdown of -30.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBFB and APLY.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBFB	APLY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.65%	-30.41%	+21.76%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.79%	-11.76%	+7.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-30.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	0.00%	-0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.60%	-6.81%	+6.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.73%	4.88%	-4.15%

Volatility

PBFB vs. APLY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) is 1.20%, while YieldMax AAPL Option Income Strategy ETF (APLY) has a volatility of 9.53%. This indicates that PBFB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than APLY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBFB	APLY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.20%	9.53%	-8.33%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.01%	16.20%	-12.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.84%	20.00%	-15.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.39%	21.36%	-14.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.39%	21.36%	-14.97%

PBFB vs. APLY - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBFB has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than APLY's 0.99% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBFB vs. APLY - Dividend Comparison

PBFB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while APLY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 34.80%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
APLY YieldMax AAPL Option Income Strategy ETF	34.80%	36.38%	24.95%	14.36%
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBFB and APLY in my portfolio?

PBFB and APLY have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBFB or APLY?

APLY has higher volatility (9.53%) compared to PBFB (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBFB dropped -8.65% vs APLY's -30.41%.

Which ETF is better, PBFB or APLY?

On 1-year performance, APLY leads with 38.17% vs 11.53% for PBFB. On fees, PBFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBFB has been the lower-risk option at 1.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBFB or APLY?

Over the 1-year period, APLY has performed better with a 38.17% return vs 11.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBFB or APLY?

PBFB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for APLY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBFB or APLY?

APLY has the higher dividend yield at 34.80%, compared with 0.00% for PBFB.

What is the main difference between PBFB and APLY?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and YieldMax. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBFB and 0.99% for APLY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 1.92), 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.