PBJA vs. FEBP

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January (PBJA) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP).

PBJA and FEBP are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PBJA is an actively managed fund by PGIM. It was launched on Dec 29, 2023. FEBP is an actively managed fund by PGIM. It was launched on Jan 31, 2024.

Performance

PBJA vs. FEBP - 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 PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

PBJA vs. FEBP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBJA PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January	-1.47%	10.33%	10.44%
FEBP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February	-1.82%	12.06%	12.73%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBJA achieves a -1.47% return, which is significantly higher than FEBP's -1.82% return.

PBJA

• 1D: 1.34%
• 1M: -1.41%
• YTD: -1.47%
• 6M: 1.02%
• 1Y: 10.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEBP

• 1D: 1.86%
• 1M: -3.04%
• YTD: -1.82%
• 6M: 1.02%
• 1Y: 13.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBJA vs. FEBP - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both PBJA and FEBP have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

PBJA

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January

FEBP

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February

Return for Risk

PBJA vs. FEBP — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBJA

PBJA Risk / Return Rank: 73
PBJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
PBJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
PBJA Omega Ratio Rank: 80
PBJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
PBJA Martin Ratio Rank: 82

FEBP

FEBP Risk / Return Rank: 71
FEBP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
FEBP Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
FEBP Omega Ratio Rank: 75
FEBP Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FEBP Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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. FEBP - 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 PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP). 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.

	PBJA	FEBP	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.21	1.19	+0.03
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.82	1.79	+0.03
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.29	+0.02
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.69	1.71	-0.02
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.52	9.14	+0.38
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PBJA vs. FEBP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBJA Sharpe Ratio is 1.21, which is comparable to the FEBP Sharpe Ratio of 1.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBJA and FEBP, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PBJA	FEBP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.21	1.19	+0.03
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.43	1.15	+0.27

Correlation

The correlation between PBJA and FEBP is 0.94, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

PBJA vs. FEBP - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBJA nor FEBP has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

PBJA vs. FEBP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBJA drawdown since its inception was -8.50%, smaller than the maximum FEBP drawdown of -12.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBJA and FEBP.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBJA	FEBP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.50%	-12.11%	+3.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.16%	-8.19%	+2.03%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.29%	-3.71%	+1.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.58%	-0.95%	+0.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.09%	1.54%	-0.45%

Volatility

PBJA vs. FEBP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January (PBJA) is 2.50%, while PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - February (FEBP) has a volatility of 3.47%. This indicates that PBJA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEBP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBJA	FEBP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.50%	3.47%	-0.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.73%	5.55%	-1.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.31%	11.60%	-3.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.53%	9.16%	-2.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.53%	9.16%	-2.63%