PBFB vs. GFEB
PBFB (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February) and GFEB (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February) are both Options Trading funds. PBFB is actively managed, while GFEB is passively managed. Over the past year, PBFB returned 13.63% vs 15.17% for GFEB. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBFB charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GFEB.
Performance
PBFB vs. GFEB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBFB achieves a 4.68% return, which is significantly lower than GFEB's 5.83% return.
PBFB
- 1D
- -0.15%
- 1M
- 1.70%
- YTD
- 4.68%
- 6M
- 5.66%
- 1Y
- 13.63%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GFEB
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 1.89%
- YTD
- 5.83%
- 6M
- 6.55%
- 1Y
- 15.17%
- 3Y*
- 13.04%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBFB vs. GFEB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
PBFB PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February | 4.68% | 9.86% | 10.00% |
GFEB FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February | 5.83% | 11.19% | 11.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between PBFB and GFEB is 0.93, 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 | 0.93 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024 | 0.90 |
The correlation between PBFB and GFEB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.93 - 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. GFEB — Risk / Return Rank
PBFB
GFEB
PBFB vs. GFEB - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB). 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.
| PBFB | GFEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.87 | 2.77 | +0.11 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.27 | 4.09 | +0.18 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.61 | 1.56 | +0.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.61 | 3.41 | +0.20 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.17 | 18.40 | +0.77 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PBFB | GFEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.87 | 2.77 | +0.11 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.67 | 1.79 | -0.12 |
Drawdowns
PBFB vs. GFEB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBFB drawdown since its inception was -8.65%, smaller than the maximum GFEB drawdown of -9.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBFB and GFEB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PBFB | GFEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.65% | -9.63% | +0.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.79% | -4.46% | +0.67% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -9.63% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.15% | -0.21% | +0.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.60% | -0.69% | +0.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.71% | 0.83% | -0.12% |
Volatility
PBFB vs. GFEB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - February (PBFB) is 0.75%, while FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - February (GFEB) has a volatility of 0.91%. This indicates that PBFB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GFEB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PBFB | GFEB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.75% | 0.91% | -0.16% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.71% | 4.21% | -0.50% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.77% | 5.51% | -0.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.39% | 7.57% | -1.18% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.39% | 7.57% | -1.18% |
PBFB vs. GFEB - Expense Ratio Comparison
PBFB has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GFEB's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
PBFB vs. GFEB - Dividend Comparison
Neither PBFB nor GFEB has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.93, PBFB and GFEB 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.
GFEB has higher volatility (0.91%) compared to PBFB (0.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBFB dropped -8.65% vs GFEB's -9.63%.
On 1-year performance, GFEB leads with 15.17% vs 13.63% for PBFB. On fees, PBFB is cheaper at 0.50% 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, GFEB has performed better with a 15.17% 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 0.85% for GFEB.
PBFB and GFEB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: PGIM and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBFB and 0.85% for GFEB.
PBFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.87 vs 2.77), 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.
Find the right allocation for PBFB and GFEB
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