PBMR vs. FEBT

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PBMR (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March) and FEBT (Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBMR returned 13.38% vs 20.53% for FEBT. Their correlation of 0.93 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBMR charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.74%/yr for FEBT.

Performance

PBMR vs. FEBT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBMR achieves a 5.16% return, which is significantly lower than FEBT's 8.10% return.

PBMR

• 1D: 0.20%
• 1M: 1.41%
• YTD: 5.16%
• 6M: 6.05%
• 1Y: 13.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FEBT

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 2.45%
• YTD: 8.10%
• 6M: 9.05%
• 1Y: 20.53%
• 3Y*: 16.51%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PBMR vs. FEBT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March	5.16%	10.89%	9.41%
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	8.10%	12.72%	10.75%

Correlation

The correlation between PBMR and FEBT is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 4, 2024	0.93

The correlation between PBMR and FEBT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBMR vs. FEBT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBMR

PBMR Risk / Return Rank: 90
PBMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
PBMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
PBMR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
PBMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
PBMR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

FEBT

FEBT Risk / Return Rank: 82
FEBT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
FEBT Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
FEBT Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FEBT Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
FEBT Martin Ratio Rank: 85

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.

PBMR vs. FEBT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT). 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.

	PBMR	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.12	2.69	+0.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.75	3.88	+0.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.69	1.52	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.04	3.41	+0.62
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.69	17.43	+6.25
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PBMR vs. FEBT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBMR Sharpe Ratio is 3.12, which is comparable to the FEBT Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBMR and FEBT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PBMR	FEBT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.12	2.69	+0.43
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.74	1.65	+0.09

Drawdowns

PBMR vs. FEBT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBMR drawdown since its inception was -7.64%, smaller than the maximum FEBT drawdown of -13.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBMR and FEBT.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBMR	FEBT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.64%	-13.19%	+5.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.33%	-6.04%	+2.71%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.19%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	-0.16%	+0.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.50%	-1.18%	+0.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.57%	1.18%	-0.61%

Volatility

PBMR vs. FEBT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) is 0.76%, while Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF (FEBT) has a volatility of 1.22%. This indicates that PBMR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FEBT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBMR	FEBT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.76%	1.22%	-0.46%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.39%	5.98%	-2.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.31%	7.66%	-3.35%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.60%	9.75%	-3.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.60%	9.75%	-3.15%

PBMR vs. FEBT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBMR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than FEBT's 0.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBMR vs. FEBT - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBMR nor FEBT has paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FEBT Allianzim U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Feb ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.28%
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBMR and FEBT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, PBMR and FEBT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, PBMR or FEBT?

FEBT has higher volatility (1.22%) compared to PBMR (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBMR dropped -7.64% vs FEBT's -13.19%.

Which ETF is better, PBMR or FEBT?

On 1-year performance, FEBT leads with 20.53% vs 13.38% for PBMR. On fees, PBMR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBMR has been the lower-risk option at 0.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBMR or FEBT?

Over the 1-year period, FEBT has performed better with a 20.53% return vs 13.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBMR or FEBT?

PBMR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for FEBT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PBMR or FEBT?

PBMR and FEBT have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PBMR and FEBT?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBMR and 0.74% for FEBT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.12 vs 2.69), 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.