PBJL vs. PMAP
PBJL (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - July) and PMAP (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds from PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBJL returned 10.02% vs 6.55% for PMAP. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.
Performance
PBJL vs. PMAP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBJL achieves a 4.38% return, which is significantly higher than PMAP's 3.39% return.
PBJL
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.32%
- 6M
- 4.38%
- YTD
- 4.38%
- 1Y
- 10.02%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PMAP
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.09%
- 6M
- 3.39%
- YTD
- 3.39%
- 1Y
- 6.55%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBJL vs. PMAP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PBJL PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - July | 4.38% | 13.47% |
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April | 3.39% | 5.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between PBJL and PMAP is 0.81, 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 | 0.81 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025 | 0.82 |
The correlation between PBJL and PMAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 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
PBJL vs. PMAP — Risk / Return Rank
PBJL
PMAP
PBJL vs. PMAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - July (PBJL) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). 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.
| PBJL | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.28 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -7.57 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.52 | 2.60 | -1.08 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.50 | 18.87 | -15.38 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.57 | 92.66 | -73.09 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PBJL vs. PMAP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBJL drawdown since its inception was -9.02%, which is greater than PMAP's maximum drawdown of -1.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBJL and PMAP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PBJL | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.02% | -1.75% | -7.27% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.88% | -0.35% | -2.53% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.03% | 0.00% | -0.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.69% | -0.08% | -0.61% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.51% | 0.07% | +0.44% |
Volatility
PBJL vs. PMAP - Volatility Comparison
PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - July (PBJL) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) have volatilities of 0.42% and 0.42%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PBJL | PMAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.42% | 0.42% | 0.00% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.18% | 0.89% | +2.29% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.15% | 1.15% | +3.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.19% | 2.29% | +4.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.19% | 2.29% | +4.90% |
PBJL vs. PMAP - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both PBJL and PMAP have an expense ratio of 0.50%.
Dividends
PBJL vs. PMAP - Dividend Comparison
Neither PBJL nor PMAP has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
PBJL and PMAP have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PMAP has higher volatility (0.42%) compared to PBJL (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBJL dropped -9.02% vs PMAP's -1.75%.
On 1-year performance, PBJL leads with 10.02% vs 6.55% for PMAP. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. 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, PBJL has performed better with a 10.02% return vs 6.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PBJL and PMAP have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.
PBJL and PMAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.70 vs 2.43), 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 PBJL and PMAP
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