PBMR vs. GSG

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

PBMR (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - PBMR is a Options Trading fund actively managed by PGIM, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. PBMR is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past year, PBMR returned 11.43% vs 39.13% for GSG. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. PBMR charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.

Performance

PBMR vs. GSG - 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 iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBMR achieves a 5.74% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 35.21% return.

PBMR

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.49%
• 6M: 5.44%
• YTD: 5.74%
• 1Y: 11.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GSG

• 1D: 0.58%
• 1M: 3.48%
• 6M: 29.81%
• YTD: 35.21%
• 1Y: 39.13%
• 3Y*: 15.23%
• 5Y*: 14.42%
• 10Y*: 7.63%

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

PBMR vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March	5.74%	10.89%	9.62%
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust	35.21%	5.93%	3.08%

Correlation

The correlation between PBMR and GSG is -0.18, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2024	-0.01

The correlation between PBMR and GSG shifts across timeframes, from -0.18 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PBMR vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBMR

PBMR Risk / Return Rank: 91
PBMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
PBMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
PBMR Omega Ratio Rank: 94
PBMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
PBMR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

GSG

GSG Risk / Return Rank: 57
GSG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
GSG Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
GSG Omega Ratio Rank: 60
GSG Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
GSG Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. GSG - 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 iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.

	PBMR	GSG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.63	1.68	+0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.96	2.28	+1.69
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	1.30	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.45	2.09	+1.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.64	7.02	+12.61

PBMR vs. GSG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBMR Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is higher than the GSG Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBMR and GSG, 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

PBMR vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBMR drawdown since its inception was -7.64%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBMR and GSG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBMR	GSG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.64%	-89.62%	+81.98%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.33%	-18.81%	+15.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-18.81%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.12%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-57.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-59.18%	+59.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.50%	-63.69%	+63.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.58%	5.59%	-5.01%

Volatility

PBMR vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) is 1.31%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 7.27%. This indicates that PBMR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBMR	GSG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.31%	7.27%	-5.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.69%	21.53%	-17.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.38%	23.45%	-19.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.52%	22.80%	-16.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.52%	22.00%	-15.48%

PBMR vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBMR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBMR vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison

Neither PBMR nor GSG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBMR and GSG in my portfolio?

PBMR and GSG have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBMR or GSG?

GSG has higher volatility (7.27%) compared to PBMR (1.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBMR dropped -7.64% vs GSG's -89.62%.

Which ETF is better, PBMR or GSG?

On 1-year performance, GSG leads with 39.13% vs 11.43% for PBMR. On fees, PBMR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBMR has been the lower-risk option at 1.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBMR or GSG?

Over the 1-year period, GSG has performed better with a 39.13% return vs 11.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBMR or GSG?

PBMR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.

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

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

What is the main difference between PBMR and GSG?

PBMR is categorized as Options Trading, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBMR and 0.75% for GSG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 1.68), 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.