PBFR vs. EINC

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

PBFR (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF) and EINC (VanEck Energy Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBFR is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM, while EINC is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS North America Energy Infrastructure Index. PBFR is actively managed, while EINC is passively managed. Over the past year, PBFR returned 11.13% vs 30.66% for EINC. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PBFR charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for EINC.

Performance

PBFR vs. EINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) and VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBFR achieves a 5.34% return, which is significantly lower than EINC's 26.77% return.

PBFR

• 1D: 0.16%
• 1M: 1.02%
• 6M: 4.80%
• YTD: 5.34%
• 1Y: 11.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EINC

• 1D: 0.19%
• 1M: 0.31%
• 6M: 28.45%
• YTD: 26.77%
• 1Y: 30.66%
• 3Y*: 28.13%
• 5Y*: 21.31%
• 10Y*: 11.56%

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

PBFR vs. EINC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF	5.34%	10.44%	5.53%
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	26.77%	7.11%	22.72%

Correlation

The correlation between PBFR and EINC is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2024	0.21

The correlation between PBFR and EINC shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.21 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PBFR vs. EINC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PBFR	EINC
Technology	38.4%	-
Financial Services	11.0%	-
Communication Services	10.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	-
Healthcare	8.4%	-
Industrials	7.9%	0.6%
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	-
Energy	3.2%	99.4%
Utilities	2.1%	0.6%
Real Estate	1.8%	-
Basic Materials	1.7%	-

Return for Risk

PBFR vs. EINC — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBFR

PBFR Risk / Return Rank: 92
PBFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
PBFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
PBFR Omega Ratio Rank: 94
PBFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
PBFR Martin Ratio Rank: 94

EINC

EINC Risk / Return Rank: 78
EINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
EINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
EINC Omega Ratio Rank: 77
EINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
EINC Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

PBFR vs. EINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) and VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC). 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.

	PBFR	EINC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.56	2.05	+0.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	2.78	+0.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.36	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.90	3.98	-0.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.05	9.80	+10.26

PBFR vs. EINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBFR Sharpe Ratio is 2.56, which is comparable to the EINC Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBFR and EINC, 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

PBFR vs. EINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBFR drawdown since its inception was -8.50%, smaller than the maximum EINC drawdown of -87.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBFR and EINC.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBFR	EINC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.50%	-87.55%	+79.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.82%	-7.89%	+5.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.01%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.87%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-68.85%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-3.89%	+3.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.62%	-44.02%	+43.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.55%	3.20%	-2.65%

Volatility

PBFR vs. EINC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) is 1.24%, while VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) has a volatility of 6.16%. This indicates that PBFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBFR	EINC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.24%	6.16%	-4.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.54%	12.26%	-8.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.28%	15.33%	-11.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.79%	19.58%	-12.79%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.79%	25.33%	-18.54%

PBFR vs. EINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBFR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than EINC's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBFR vs. EINC - Dividend Comparison

PBFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than EINC's 3.49% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	3.49%	4.51%	3.33%	3.77%	2.89%	6.03%	6.69%	9.66%	11.31%	8.53%	9.71%	28.53%
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBFR and EINC in my portfolio?

PBFR and EINC have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBFR or EINC?

EINC has higher volatility (6.16%) compared to PBFR (1.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBFR dropped -8.50% vs EINC's -87.55%.

Which ETF is better, PBFR or EINC?

On 1-year performance, EINC leads with 30.66% vs 11.13% for PBFR. On fees, EINC is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, PBFR has been the lower-risk option at 1.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBFR or EINC?

Over the 1-year period, EINC has performed better with a 30.66% return vs 11.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBFR or EINC?

EINC is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PBFR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBFR or EINC?

EINC has the higher dividend yield at 3.49%, compared with 0.01% for PBFR.

What is the main difference between PBFR and EINC?

PBFR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while EINC is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBFR and 0.45% for EINC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.56 vs 2.05), 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.