PBMR vs. JULZ

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

PBMR (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March) and JULZ (Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF) are both Options Trading funds. PBMR is actively managed, while JULZ is passively managed. Over the past year, PBMR returned 11.37% vs 16.64% for JULZ. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PBMR charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for JULZ.

Performance

PBMR vs. JULZ - 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 Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PBMR achieves a 4.56% return, which is significantly lower than JULZ's 5.81% return.

PBMR

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: -0.14%
• YTD: 4.56%
• 6M: 4.59%
• 1Y: 11.37%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

JULZ

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: -1.68%
• YTD: 5.81%
• 6M: 4.69%
• 1Y: 16.64%
• 3Y*: 15.30%
• 5Y*: 10.44%
• 10Y*: —

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

PBMR vs. JULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March	4.56%	10.89%	9.62%
JULZ Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF	5.81%	13.23%	12.45%

Correlation

The correlation between PBMR and JULZ is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 1, 2024	0.94

The correlation between PBMR and JULZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PBMR vs. JULZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBMR

PBMR Risk / Return Rank: 89
PBMR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
PBMR Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
PBMR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
PBMR Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
PBMR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

JULZ

JULZ Risk / Return Rank: 50
JULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
JULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
JULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 50
JULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
JULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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. JULZ - 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 Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ). 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	JULZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.63	1.56	+1.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.94	2.17	+1.77
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	1.28	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.43	1.96	+1.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.62	8.25	+11.37

PBMR vs. JULZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBMR Sharpe Ratio is 2.63, which is higher than the JULZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBMR and JULZ, 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. JULZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBMR drawdown since its inception was -7.64%, smaller than the maximum JULZ drawdown of -14.71%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBMR and JULZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBMR	JULZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.64%	-14.71%	+7.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.33%	-8.53%	+5.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.71%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-14.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.65%	-3.25%	+2.60%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.50%	-2.97%	+2.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.58%	2.02%	-1.44%

Volatility

PBMR vs. JULZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) is 1.40%, while Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) has a volatility of 4.08%. This indicates that PBMR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than JULZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PBMR	JULZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.40%	4.08%	-2.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.61%	8.76%	-5.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.37%	10.76%	-6.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.58%	12.29%	-5.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.58%	12.36%	-5.78%

PBMR vs. JULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBMR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than JULZ's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBMR vs. JULZ - Dividend Comparison

PBMR has not paid dividends to shareholders, while JULZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.31%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
JULZ Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF	11.31%	11.96%	3.30%	3.59%	0.07%
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBMR and JULZ in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, PBMR and JULZ 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 JULZ?

JULZ has higher volatility (4.08%) compared to PBMR (1.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBMR dropped -7.64% vs JULZ's -14.71%.

Which ETF is better, PBMR or JULZ?

On 1-year performance, JULZ leads with 16.64% vs 11.37% for PBMR. On fees, PBMR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBMR has been the lower-risk option at 1.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PBMR or JULZ?

Over the 1-year period, JULZ has performed better with a 16.64% return vs 11.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBMR or JULZ?

PBMR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JULZ.

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

JULZ has the higher dividend yield at 11.31%, compared with 0.00% for PBMR.

What is the main difference between PBMR and JULZ?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and TrueShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBMR and 0.79% for JULZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBMR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.63 vs 1.56), 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.