PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PBFB vs. AUGT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PBFB vs. AUGT - 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 AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBFB achieves a 4.68% return, which is significantly lower than AUGT's 6.25% return.


PBFB

1D
-0.15%
1M
1.70%
YTD
4.68%
6M
5.66%
1Y
13.63%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

AUGT

1D
-0.09%
1M
2.19%
YTD
6.25%
6M
6.91%
1Y
19.22%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBFB vs. AUGT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
PBFB
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February
4.68%9.86%10.00%
AUGT
AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF
6.25%14.64%17.19%

Correlation

The correlation between PBFB and AUGT is 0.95, 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

0.95

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

0.92

The correlation between PBFB and AUGT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - 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

PBFB vs. AUGT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBFB
PBFB Risk / Return Rank: 8686
Overall Rank
PBFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBFB Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
PBFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBFB Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

AUGT
AUGT Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
AUGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
AUGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
AUGT Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
AUGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 7272
Calmar Ratio Rank
AUGT Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
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.

PBFB vs. AUGT - 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 AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT). 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.


PBFBAUGTDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.87

2.58

+0.29

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.27

3.70

+0.57

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

1.52

+0.09

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.61

3.60

+0.02

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

19.17

18.69

+0.48

PBFB vs. AUGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBFB Sharpe Ratio is 2.87, which is comparable to the AUGT Sharpe Ratio of 2.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBFB and AUGT, 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


PBFBAUGTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.87

2.58

+0.29

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.67

1.56

+0.11

Drawdowns

PBFB vs. AUGT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBFB drawdown since its inception was -8.65%, smaller than the maximum AUGT drawdown of -13.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBFB and AUGT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PBFBAUGTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.65%

-13.12%

+4.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.79%

-5.36%

+1.57%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.15%

-0.09%

-0.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.60%

-1.22%

+0.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.71%

1.03%

-0.32%

Volatility

PBFB vs. AUGT - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) and AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) have volatilities of 0.75% and 0.73%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PBFBAUGTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.75%

0.73%

+0.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.71%

5.50%

-1.79%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.77%

7.50%

-2.73%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.39%

10.19%

-3.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.39%

10.19%

-3.80%

PBFB vs. AUGT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBFB has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than AUGT's 0.74% expense ratio.


Dividends

PBFB vs. AUGT - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBFB nor AUGT has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.95, PBFB and AUGT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

PBFB has higher volatility (0.75%) compared to AUGT (0.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBFB dropped -8.65% vs AUGT's -13.12%.

On 1-year performance, AUGT leads with 19.22% vs 13.63% for PBFB. On fees, PBFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, AUGT has performed better with a 19.22% return vs 13.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PBFB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for AUGT.

PBFB and AUGT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBFB and 0.74% for AUGT.

PBFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.58), 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 PBFB and AUGT

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