PBJA vs. GMAR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PBJA (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January) and GMAR (FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBJA returned 12.85% vs 15.30% for GMAR. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBJA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for GMAR.

Performance

PBJA vs. GMAR - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBJA achieves a 4.34% return, which is significantly lower than GMAR's 7.89% return.

PBJA

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 1.54%
• YTD: 4.34%
• 6M: 5.14%
• 1Y: 12.85%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GMAR

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 1.52%
• YTD: 7.89%
• 6M: 8.66%
• 1Y: 15.30%
• 3Y*: 12.24%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBJA vs. GMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBJA PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January	4.34%	10.33%	12.18%
GMAR FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March	7.89%	9.29%	12.26%

Correlation

The correlation between PBJA and GMAR is 0.85, 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	0.85
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2024	0.85

The correlation between PBJA and GMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.85 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBJA vs. GMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBJA

PBJA Risk / Return Rank: 85
PBJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
PBJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
PBJA Omega Ratio Rank: 91
PBJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 73
PBJA Martin Ratio Rank: 89

GMAR

GMAR Risk / Return Rank: 97
GMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
GMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
GMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
GMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
GMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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. GMAR - 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 FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR). 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	GMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.80	3.94	-1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.18	6.60	-2.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.60	2.02	-0.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.60	8.56	-4.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.59	59.52	-39.94
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. GMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.80, which is comparable to the GMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBJA and GMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PBJA	GMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.80	3.94	-1.14
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.76	1.91	-0.15

Drawdowns

PBJA vs. GMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBJA drawdown since its inception was -8.50%, smaller than the maximum GMAR drawdown of -9.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBJA and GMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBJA	GMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.50%	-9.11%	+0.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.58%	-1.79%	-1.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-9.11%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-0.10%	-0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.55%	-0.54%	-0.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.66%	0.26%	+0.40%

Volatility

PBJA vs. GMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January (PBJA) is 0.64%, while FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - March (GMAR) has a volatility of 0.69%. This indicates that PBJA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBJA	GMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.64%	0.69%	-0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.71%	2.99%	+0.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.62%	3.90%	+0.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.38%	6.84%	-0.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.38%	6.84%	-0.46%

PBJA vs. GMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBJA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GMAR's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBJA vs. GMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBJA nor GMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBJA and GMAR in my portfolio?

PBJA and GMAR have a correlation of 0.85, 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 GMAR?

GMAR has higher volatility (0.69%) compared to PBJA (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBJA dropped -8.50% vs GMAR's -9.11%.

Which ETF is better, PBJA or GMAR?

On 1-year performance, GMAR leads with 15.30% vs 12.85% for PBJA. On fees, PBJA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBJA or GMAR?

Over the 1-year period, GMAR has performed better with a 15.30% return vs 12.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBJA or GMAR?

PBJA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for GMAR.

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

PBJA and GMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PBJA and GMAR?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBJA and 0.85% for GMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.94 vs 2.80), 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.