PBJN vs. EAPR

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

PBJN (PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June) and EAPR (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. PBJN is actively managed, while EAPR is passively managed. Over the past year, PBJN returned 7.79% vs 15.75% for EAPR. Their 0.54 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. PBJN charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EAPR.

Performance

PBJN vs. EAPR - 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 Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBJN achieves a 3.13% return, which is significantly lower than EAPR's 9.17% return.

PBJN

• 1D: 0.14%
• 1M: 0.17%
• 6M: 2.54%
• YTD: 3.13%
• 1Y: 7.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.15%

EAPR

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: 0.32%
• 6M: 8.21%
• YTD: 9.17%
• 1Y: 15.75%
• 3Y*: 8.62%
• 5Y*: 5.46%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 4.84%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	$354.30K	$262.28K	$462.78K
PBJN PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June	$190.56K	$168.44K	$656.43K

PBJN vs. EAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBJN PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June	3.13%	11.80%	6.86%
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	9.17%	14.80%	1.87%

Correlation

The correlation between PBJN and EAPR is 0.56, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2024	0.54

The correlation between PBJN and EAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.54 to 0.56 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBJN vs. EAPR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PBJN

PBJN Risk / Return Rank: 77
PBJN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
PBJN Sortino Ratio Rank: 69
PBJN Omega Ratio Rank: 78
PBJN Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
PBJN Martin Ratio Rank: 90

EAPR

EAPR Risk / Return Rank: 79
EAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
EAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
EAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 87
EAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
EAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 86

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PBJN vs. EAPR - 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 Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). 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	EAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.59	1.59	0.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.28	2.34	-0.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	1.39	-0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.02	2.90	+0.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.32	12.34	+1.98

PBJN vs. EAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBJN Sharpe Ratio is 1.59, which is comparable to the EAPR Sharpe Ratio of 1.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBJN and EAPR, 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. EAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBJN drawdown since its inception was -8.70%, smaller than the maximum EAPR drawdown of -17.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBJN and EAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBJN	EAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.70%	-17.65%	+8.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.40%	-5.28%	+2.88%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.24%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-16.34%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.52%	-2.78%	+2.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.61%	-4.02%	+3.41%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.51%	1.24%	-0.73%

Volatility

PBJN vs. EAPR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June (PBJN) is 1.78%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR) has a volatility of 4.40%. This indicates that PBJN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBJN	EAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.78%	4.40%	-2.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.93%	9.26%	-5.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.55%	9.63%	-5.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.29%	10.41%	-3.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.29%	10.30%	-3.01%

PBJN vs. EAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBJN has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than EAPR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBJN vs. EAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBJN nor EAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBJN and EAPR in my portfolio?

PBJN and EAPR have a correlation of 0.56, 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 EAPR?

EAPR has higher volatility (4.40%) compared to PBJN (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBJN dropped -8.70% vs EAPR's -17.65%.

Which ETF is better, PBJN or EAPR?

On 1-year performance, EAPR leads with 15.75% vs 7.79% for PBJN. On fees, PBJN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBJN has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBJN or EAPR?

Over the 1-year period, EAPR has performed better with a 15.75% return vs 7.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBJN or EAPR?

PBJN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EAPR.

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

PBJN and EAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PBJN and EAPR?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBJN and 0.89% for EAPR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.59 vs 1.59), 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.