PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PBJA vs. XMAR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PBJA vs. XMAR - 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 Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBJA achieves a 4.34% return, which is significantly lower than XMAR's 6.65% return.


PBJA

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

XMAR

1D
-0.01%
1M
1.37%
YTD
6.65%
6M
7.38%
1Y
12.89%
3Y*
11.18%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PBJA vs. XMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between PBJA and XMAR is 0.82, 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

0.82

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2024

0.80

The correlation between PBJA and XMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

PBJA vs. XMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBJA
PBJA Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
PBJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8585
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 9090
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBJA Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
PBJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBJA Martin Ratio Rank: 8989
Martin Ratio Rank

XMAR
XMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9797
Overall Rank
XMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
XMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
XMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
XMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
Martin Ratio Rank
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. XMAR - 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 Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR). 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.


PBJAXMARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.80

4.31

-1.52

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

4.18

7.46

-3.28

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.60

2.20

-0.60

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.60

8.76

-5.16

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

19.59

66.63

-47.05

PBJA vs. XMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.80, which is lower than the XMAR Sharpe Ratio of 4.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBJA and XMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PBJAXMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.80

4.31

-1.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.76

2.13

-0.37

Drawdowns

PBJA vs. XMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBJA drawdown since its inception was -8.50%, which is greater than XMAR's maximum drawdown of -7.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBJA and XMAR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PBJAXMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-8.50%

-7.29%

-1.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.58%

-1.48%

-2.10%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-7.29%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.14%

-0.16%

+0.02%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.55%

-0.30%

-0.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.66%

0.19%

+0.47%

Volatility

PBJA vs. XMAR - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - January (PBJA) has a higher volatility of 0.64% compared to FT Cboe Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - March (XMAR) at 0.58%. This indicates that PBJA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PBJAXMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.64%

0.58%

+0.06%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.71%

2.40%

+1.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.62%

3.01%

+1.61%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.38%

5.55%

+0.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.38%

5.55%

+0.83%

PBJA vs. XMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

PBJA vs. XMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBJA nor XMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


PBJA and XMAR have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PBJA has higher volatility (0.64%) compared to XMAR (0.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBJA dropped -8.50% vs XMAR's -7.29%.

On 1-year performance, XMAR leads with 12.89% 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.

Over the 1-year period, XMAR has performed better with a 12.89% return vs 12.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

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

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

XMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.31 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PBJA and XMAR

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