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

Performance

PBFB vs. COMT - 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 iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT). 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 COMT's 39.67% return.


PBFB

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

COMT

1D
0.78%
1M
-4.35%
YTD
39.67%
6M
39.06%
1Y
47.51%
3Y*
16.86%
5Y*
13.50%
10Y*
9.09%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBFB vs. COMT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
PBFB
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February
4.68%9.86%10.00%
COMT
iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF
39.67%6.07%4.25%

Correlation

The correlation between PBFB and COMT is -0.24, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.24

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

-0.01

Over the past year, the inverse relationship between PBFB and COMT has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.01 to -0.24, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.

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. COMT — 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

COMT
COMT Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
COMT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
COMT Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
COMT Omega Ratio Rank: 6464
Omega Ratio Rank
COMT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
COMT Martin Ratio Rank: 7373
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. COMT - 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 iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT). 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.


PBFBCOMTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.63

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.39

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

1.40

+0.21

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.61

5.95

-2.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.17

14.11

+5.06

PBFB vs. COMT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBFB Sharpe Ratio is 2.87, which is comparable to the COMT Sharpe Ratio of 2.24. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBFB and COMT, 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


PBFBCOMTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.87

2.24

+0.63

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.64

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.67

0.20

+1.46

Drawdowns

PBFB vs. COMT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBFB drawdown since its inception was -8.65%, smaller than the maximum COMT drawdown of -51.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBFB and COMT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PBFBCOMTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.65%

-51.89%

+43.24%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.79%

-8.02%

+4.23%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.31%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.00%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-39.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.15%

-4.82%

+4.67%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.60%

-24.07%

+23.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.71%

3.38%

-2.67%

Volatility

PBFB vs. COMT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) is 0.75%, while iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF (COMT) has a volatility of 7.37%. This indicates that PBFB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than COMT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PBFBCOMTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.75%

7.37%

-6.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.71%

18.80%

-15.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.77%

21.29%

-16.52%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.39%

21.06%

-14.67%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.39%

18.89%

-12.50%

PBFB vs. COMT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBFB has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than COMT's 0.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

PBFB vs. COMT - Dividend Comparison

PBFB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while COMT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.54%.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
COMT
iShares Commodities Select Strategy ETF
5.54%7.74%4.90%5.19%29.79%17.79%0.36%2.61%11.65%5.16%0.52%1.44%
PBFB
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PBFB and COMT have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

COMT has higher volatility (7.37%) compared to PBFB (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBFB dropped -8.65% vs COMT's -51.89%.

On 1-year performance, COMT leads with 47.51% vs 13.63% for PBFB. On fees, COMT is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, PBFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, COMT has performed better with a 47.51% return vs 13.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

COMT is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PBFB.

COMT has the higher dividend yield at 5.54%, compared with 0.00% for PBFB.

PBFB is categorized as Options Trading, while COMT is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBFB and 0.48% for COMT.

PBFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.24), 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 COMT

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