PBL vs. RULE

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PBL (PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF) and RULE (Adaptive Core ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, PBL returned 14.40%/yr vs 21.26%/yr for RULE. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PBL charges 0.45%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for RULE.

Performance

PBL vs. RULE - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBL achieves a 7.15% return, which is significantly lower than RULE's 49.82% return.

PBL

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 0.73%
• YTD: 7.15%
• 6M: 6.87%
• 1Y: 18.53%
• 3Y*: 14.40%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RULE

• 1D: 2.20%
• 1M: 13.27%
• YTD: 49.82%
• 6M: 47.98%
• 1Y: 57.12%
• 3Y*: 21.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBL vs. RULE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
PBL PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF	7.15%	12.35%	16.70%	14.28%	-4.02%
RULE Adaptive Core ETF	49.82%	4.60%	7.59%	6.29%	0.16%

Correlation

The correlation between PBL and RULE is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2022	0.76

The correlation between PBL and RULE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBL vs. RULE — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBL

PBL Risk / Return Rank: 64
PBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
PBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
PBL Omega Ratio Rank: 59
PBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
PBL Martin Ratio Rank: 70

RULE

RULE Risk / Return Rank: 81
RULE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
RULE Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
RULE Omega Ratio Rank: 78
RULE Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
RULE Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

PBL vs. RULE - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL) and Adaptive Core ETF (RULE). 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.

	PBL	RULE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.00	2.52	-0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.81	3.23	-0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	1.44	-0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.20	4.54	-1.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.53	17.58	-5.04

PBL vs. RULE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBL Sharpe Ratio is 2.00, which is comparable to the RULE Sharpe Ratio of 2.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBL and RULE, 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

PBL vs. RULE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBL drawdown since its inception was -11.69%, smaller than the maximum RULE drawdown of -30.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBL and RULE.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBL	RULE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.69%	-30.48%	+18.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.82%	-12.65%	+6.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.69%	-20.21%	+8.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.90%	0.00%	-0.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.66%	-14.85%	+13.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.48%	3.26%	-1.78%

Volatility

PBL vs. RULE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL) is 3.41%, while Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) has a volatility of 11.94%. This indicates that PBL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RULE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBL	RULE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.41%	11.94%	-8.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.06%	20.18%	-13.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.33%	22.87%	-13.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.91%	15.56%	-5.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.91%	15.56%	-5.65%

PBL vs. RULE - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBL has a 0.45% expense ratio, which is lower than RULE's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBL vs. RULE - Dividend Comparison

PBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.07%, while RULE has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
PBL PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF	2.07%	2.21%	6.89%	7.92%	0.16%
RULE Adaptive Core ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	2.01%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBL and RULE in my portfolio?

PBL and RULE have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBL or RULE?

RULE has higher volatility (11.94%) compared to PBL (3.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBL dropped -11.69% vs RULE's -30.48%.

Which ETF is better, PBL or RULE?

On 3-year performance, RULE leads with 21.26% vs 14.40% for PBL. On fees, PBL is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, PBL has been the lower-risk option at 3.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBL or RULE?

Over the 3-year period, RULE has performed better with a 21.26% return vs 14.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBL or RULE?

PBL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for RULE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBL or RULE?

PBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.07%, compared with 0.00% for RULE.

What is the main difference between PBL and RULE?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Mohr Funds. Their fees differ too: 0.45% for PBL and 1.10% for RULE.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RULE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.00), 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.