PBJA vs. EINC

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

PBJA (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January) and EINC (VanEck Energy Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBJA is a Options Trading fund actively managed by PGIM, while EINC is a Energy Equities fund tracking the MVIS North America Energy Infrastructure Index. PBJA is actively managed, while EINC is passively managed. Over the past year, PBJA returned 11.11% vs 30.33% for EINC. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PBJA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for EINC.

Performance

PBJA vs. EINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January (PBJA) 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, PBJA achieves a 3.88% return, which is significantly lower than EINC's 26.86% return.

PBJA

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: -0.18%
• YTD: 3.88%
• 6M: 4.07%
• 1Y: 11.11%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EINC

• 1D: 1.61%
• 1M: -1.34%
• YTD: 26.86%
• 6M: 26.99%
• 1Y: 30.33%
• 3Y*: 29.92%
• 5Y*: 21.22%
• 10Y*: 12.63%

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

PBJA vs. EINC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBJA PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January	3.88%	10.33%	12.05%
EINC VanEck Energy Income ETF	26.86%	7.11%	42.79%

Correlation

The correlation between PBJA 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 Jan 2, 2024	0.21

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

Return for Risk

PBJA vs. EINC — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBJA

PBJA Risk / Return Rank: 84
PBJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
PBJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 89
PBJA Omega Ratio Rank: 90
PBJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
PBJA Martin Ratio Rank: 88

EINC

EINC Risk / Return Rank: 71
EINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
EINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 68
EINC Omega Ratio Rank: 69
EINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
EINC Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

PBJA vs. EINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January (PBJA) 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.

	PBJA	EINC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	2.01	+0.40
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.58	2.71	+0.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.35	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.11	3.86	-0.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.65	9.71	+6.94

PBJA vs. EINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is comparable to the EINC Sharpe Ratio of 2.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBJA 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

PBJA vs. EINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBJA 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 PBJA and EINC.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBJA	EINC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.50%	-87.55%	+79.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.58%	-7.89%	+4.31%
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	-0.63%	-3.83%	+3.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.55%	-44.13%	+43.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.67%	3.13%	-2.46%

Volatility

PBJA vs. EINC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January (PBJA) is 1.36%, while VanEck Energy Income ETF (EINC) has a volatility of 6.06%. This indicates that PBJA 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

	PBJA	EINC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.36%	6.06%	-4.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.93%	11.99%	-8.06%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.63%	15.16%	-10.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.35%	19.56%	-13.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.35%	25.43%	-19.08%

PBJA vs. EINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

PBJA vs. EINC - Dividend Comparison

PBJA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EINC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.49%.

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%
PBJA PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January	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

Can I hold both PBJA and EINC in my portfolio?

PBJA 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, PBJA or EINC?

EINC has higher volatility (6.06%) compared to PBJA (1.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBJA dropped -8.50% vs EINC's -87.55%.

Which ETF is better, PBJA or EINC?

On 1-year performance, EINC leads with 30.33% vs 11.11% for PBJA. On fees, EINC is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, PBJA has been the lower-risk option at 1.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBJA or EINC?

Over the 1-year period, EINC has performed better with a 30.33% return vs 11.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBJA or EINC?

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

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

EINC has the higher dividend yield at 3.49%, compared with 0.00% for PBJA.

What is the main difference between PBJA and EINC?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBJA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.41 vs 2.01), 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.