PBL vs. INCM
PBL (PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF) and INCM (Franklin Income Focus ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBL returned 19.49% vs 15.73% for INCM. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PBL charges 0.45%/yr vs 0.38%/yr for INCM.
Performance
PBL vs. INCM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBL achieves a 7.85% return, which is significantly higher than INCM's 6.45% return.
PBL
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 4.07%
- YTD
- 7.85%
- 6M
- 8.56%
- 1Y
- 19.49%
- 3Y*
- 15.09%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
INCM
- 1D
- -0.48%
- 1M
- 0.70%
- YTD
- 6.45%
- 6M
- 6.84%
- 1Y
- 15.73%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBL vs. INCM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
PBL PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF | 7.85% | 12.35% | 16.70% | 7.66% |
INCM Franklin Income Focus ETF | 6.45% | 13.07% | 6.80% | 5.76% |
Correlation
The correlation between PBL and INCM is 0.57, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 9, 2023 | 0.63 |
The correlation between PBL and INCM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.63 - 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
PBL vs. INCM — Risk / Return Rank
PBL
INCM
PBL vs. INCM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL) and Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM). 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.
| PBL | INCM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.80 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 1.57 | -0.19 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.37 | 4.95 | -1.58 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.56 | 20.86 | -7.30 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PBL | INCM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.21 | 3.01 | -0.80 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.40 | 1.51 | -0.11 |
Drawdowns
PBL vs. INCM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBL drawdown since its inception was -11.69%, which is greater than INCM's maximum drawdown of -7.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBL and INCM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PBL | INCM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -11.69% | -7.84% | -3.85% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.82% | -3.19% | -2.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.69% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.21% | -0.75% | +0.54% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.65% | -1.09% | -0.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.44% | 0.76% | +0.68% |
Volatility
PBL vs. INCM - Volatility Comparison
PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL) has a higher volatility of 2.51% compared to Franklin Income Focus ETF (INCM) at 1.66%. This indicates that PBL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than INCM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PBL | INCM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.51% | 1.66% | +0.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.56% | 3.82% | +2.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.87% | 5.25% | +3.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.83% | 7.23% | +2.60% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.83% | 7.23% | +2.60% |
PBL vs. INCM - Expense Ratio Comparison
PBL has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is higher than INCM's 0.38% expense ratio.
Dividends
PBL vs. INCM - Dividend Comparison
PBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.05%, less than INCM's 5.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INCM Franklin Income Focus ETF | 5.08% | 4.96% | 5.06% | 3.01% | 0.00% |
PBL PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF | 2.05% | 2.21% | 6.89% | 7.92% | 0.16% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PBL and INCM have a correlation of 0.57, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PBL has higher volatility (2.51%) compared to INCM (1.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBL dropped -11.69% vs INCM's -7.84%.
On 1-year performance, PBL leads with 19.49% vs 15.73% for INCM. On fees, INCM is cheaper at 0.38% per year. On volatility, INCM has been the lower-risk option at 1.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PBL has performed better with a 19.49% return vs 15.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
INCM is cheaper with a 0.38% expense ratio, compared with 0.45% for PBL.
INCM has the higher dividend yield at 5.08%, compared with 2.05% for PBL.
They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for PBL and 0.38% for INCM.
INCM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.01 vs 2.21), 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 PBL and INCM
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