PBFB vs. AUGT

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

PBFB (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February) and AUGT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBFB returned 11.47% vs 15.48% for AUGT. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. PBFB charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for AUGT.

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.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBFB achieves a 5.25% return, which is significantly lower than AUGT's 7.98% return.

PBFB

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: 0.41%
• 6M: 4.03%
• YTD: 5.25%
• 1Y: 11.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 9.55%

AUGT

• 1D: 0.07%
• 1M: 1.00%
• 6M: 7.01%
• YTD: 7.98%
• 1Y: 15.48%
• 3Y*: 15.48%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 15.45%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
AUGT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF	$226.85K	$120.21K	$180.29K
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	$103.06K	$113.68K	$131.93K

PBFB vs. AUGT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February	5.25%	9.86%	8.58%
AUGT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF	7.98%	14.64%	18.10%

Correlation

The correlation between PBFB and AUGT is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 1, 2024	0.91

The correlation between PBFB and AUGT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBFB vs. AUGT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PBFB

PBFB Risk / Return Rank: 88
PBFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PBFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
PBFB Omega Ratio Rank: 91
PBFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
PBFB Martin Ratio Rank: 90

AUGT

AUGT Risk / Return Rank: 84
AUGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
AUGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
AUGT Omega Ratio Rank: 87
AUGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
AUGT Martin Ratio Rank: 89

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

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	AUGT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.16	1.97	+0.19
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.16	2.82	+0.35
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.39	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.84	2.66	+0.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.77	13.81	+0.96

PBFB vs. AUGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBFB Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is comparable to the AUGT Sharpe Ratio of 1.97. 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.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBFB	AUGT	Difference
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%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.12%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	0.00%	-0.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.60%	-1.18%	+0.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.73%	1.03%	-0.30%

Volatility

PBFB vs. AUGT - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) has a higher volatility of 1.53% compared to AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Aug ETF (AUGT) at 0.95%. This indicates that PBFB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AUGT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBFB	AUGT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.53%	0.95%	+0.58%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.16%	5.41%	-1.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.99%	7.22%	-2.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.38%	9.97%	-3.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.38%	9.97%	-3.59%

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

Can I hold both PBFB and AUGT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, 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.

Which is riskier, PBFB or AUGT?

PBFB has higher volatility (1.53%) compared to AUGT (0.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBFB dropped -8.65% vs AUGT's -13.12%.

Which ETF is better, PBFB or AUGT?

On 1-year performance, AUGT leads with 15.48% vs 11.47% for PBFB. On fees, PBFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, AUGT has been the lower-risk option at 0.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBFB or AUGT?

Over the 1-year period, AUGT has performed better with a 15.48% return vs 11.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBFB or AUGT?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between PBFB and AUGT?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.97), 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.