PBFR vs. GSG
PBFR (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - PBFR is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. PBFR is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past year, PBFR returned 12.83% vs 51.52% for GSG. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. PBFR charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
PBFR vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBFR achieves a 4.52% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 42.58% return.
PBFR
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 1.58%
- YTD
- 4.52%
- 6M
- 5.34%
- 1Y
- 12.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- 0.77%
- 1M
- -4.83%
- YTD
- 42.58%
- 6M
- 41.06%
- 1Y
- 51.52%
- 3Y*
- 19.31%
- 5Y*
- 15.74%
- 10Y*
- 7.69%
PBFR vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF | 4.52% | 10.44% | 5.53% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 42.58% | 5.93% | -1.05% |
Correlation
The correlation between PBFR and GSG is -0.22, 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 | -0.22 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024 | -0.01 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between PBFR and GSG has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.01 to -0.22, 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
PBFR vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
PBFR
GSG
PBFR vs. GSG - 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 iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.
| PBFR | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.73 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.48 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.66 | 1.40 | +0.25 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.57 | 5.47 | -0.90 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 24.09 | 14.39 | +9.69 |
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
| PBFR | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.99 | 2.26 | +0.73 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.70 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.35 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.54 | -0.09 | +1.63 |
Drawdowns
PBFR vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBFR drawdown since its inception was -8.50%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBFR and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PBFR | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -8.50% | -89.62% | +81.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.82% | -9.46% | +6.64% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.94% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.16% | -56.95% | +56.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.63% | -63.71% | +63.08% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.53% | 3.59% | -3.06% |
Volatility
PBFR vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) is 0.64%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 7.65%. This indicates that PBFR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PBFR | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.64% | 7.65% | -7.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.34% | 20.42% | -17.08% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.33% | 22.95% | -18.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.89% | 22.61% | -15.72% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.89% | 22.03% | -15.14% |
PBFR vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
PBFR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
PBFR vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
PBFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PBFR and GSG have a correlation of -0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (7.65%) compared to PBFR (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBFR dropped -8.50% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 1-year performance, GSG leads with 51.52% vs 12.83% for PBFR. On fees, PBFR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBFR has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, GSG has performed better with a 51.52% return vs 12.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PBFR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
PBFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
PBFR is categorized as Defined Outcome, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBFR and 0.75% for GSG.
PBFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 2.26), 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 PBFR and GSG
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