PBJN vs. BCI

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PBJN (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June) and BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBJN is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM, while BCI is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return. PBJN is actively managed, while BCI is passively managed. Over the past year, PBJN returned 8.67% vs 23.04% for BCI. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PBJN charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.26%/yr for BCI.

Performance

PBJN vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June (PBJN) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBJN achieves a 2.33% return, which is significantly lower than BCI's 15.26% return.

PBJN

• 1D: -0.61%
• 1M: -0.85%
• YTD: 2.33%
• 6M: 2.35%
• 1Y: 8.67%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BCI

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: -9.78%
• YTD: 15.26%
• 6M: 13.54%
• 1Y: 23.04%
• 3Y*: 11.40%
• 5Y*: 9.52%
• 10Y*: —

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

PBJN vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBJN PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June	2.33%	11.80%	6.86%
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	15.26%	15.07%	-1.31%

Correlation

The correlation between PBJN and BCI is 0.02, 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	0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2024	0.08

Return for Risk

PBJN vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBJN

PBJN Risk / Return Rank: 79
PBJN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
PBJN Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
PBJN Omega Ratio Rank: 83
PBJN Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
PBJN Martin Ratio Rank: 91

BCI

BCI Risk / Return Rank: 39
BCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
BCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
BCI Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
BCI Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

PBJN vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June (PBJN) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). 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.

	PBJN	BCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	1.36	+0.70
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.96	1.84	+1.12
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.25	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.63	1.76	+1.87
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.20	6.95	+12.25

PBJN vs. BCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBJN Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is higher than the BCI Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBJN and BCI, 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

PBJN vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBJN drawdown since its inception was -8.70%, smaller than the maximum BCI drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBJN and BCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBJN	BCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.70%	-32.69%	+23.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.40%	-13.12%	+10.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.12%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.50%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.07%	-13.12%	+12.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.61%	-11.99%	+11.38%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.45%	3.34%	-2.89%

Volatility

PBJN vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June (PBJN) is 2.07%, while abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a volatility of 3.55%. This indicates that PBJN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBJN	BCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.07%	3.55%	-1.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.57%	14.98%	-11.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.25%	17.20%	-12.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.37%	16.79%	-9.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.37%	15.65%	-8.28%

PBJN vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBJN has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BCI's 0.26% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBJN vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

PBJN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.30%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	14.30%	16.49%	3.29%	3.93%	19.98%	19.43%	0.68%	1.47%	1.13%	5.02%
PBJN PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June	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 PBJN and BCI in my portfolio?

PBJN and BCI have a correlation of 0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBJN or BCI?

BCI has higher volatility (3.55%) compared to PBJN (2.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBJN dropped -8.70% vs BCI's -32.69%.

Which ETF is better, PBJN or BCI?

On 1-year performance, BCI leads with 23.04% vs 8.67% for PBJN. On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.26% per year. On volatility, PBJN has been the lower-risk option at 2.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBJN or BCI?

Over the 1-year period, BCI has performed better with a 23.04% return vs 8.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBJN or BCI?

BCI is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PBJN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBJN or BCI?

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 14.30%, compared with 0.00% for PBJN.

What is the main difference between PBJN and BCI?

PBJN is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BCI is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBJN and 0.26% for BCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBJN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.06 vs 1.36), 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.