PBMR vs. PBAP
PBMR (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March) and PBAP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April) are both Options Trading funds from PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBMR returned 13.38% vs 13.50% for PBAP. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.
Performance
PBMR vs. PBAP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBMR achieves a 5.16% return, which is significantly lower than PBAP's 6.92% return.
PBMR
- 1D
- 0.20%
- 1M
- 1.41%
- YTD
- 5.16%
- 6M
- 6.05%
- 1Y
- 13.38%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBAP
- 1D
- 0.21%
- 1M
- 1.19%
- YTD
- 6.92%
- 6M
- 7.66%
- 1Y
- 13.50%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBMR vs. PBAP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
PBMR PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March | 5.16% | 10.89% | 8.52% |
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April | 6.92% | 6.34% | 8.88% |
Correlation
The correlation between PBMR and PBAP is 0.89, 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 | 0.89 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024 | 0.92 |
The correlation between PBMR and PBAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.92 - 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
PBMR vs. PBAP — Risk / Return Rank
PBMR
PBAP
PBMR vs. PBAP - 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 PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP). 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 | PBAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.70 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.69 | 2.17 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.04 | 11.57 | -7.53 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 23.69 | 83.47 | -59.78 |
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
| PBMR | PBAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.12 | 4.35 | -1.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.74 | 1.46 | +0.28 |
Drawdowns
PBMR vs. PBAP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBMR drawdown since its inception was -7.64%, smaller than the maximum PBAP drawdown of -9.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBMR and PBAP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PBMR | PBAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.64% | -9.70% | +2.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.33% | -1.17% | -2.16% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.05% | 0.00% | -0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.50% | -0.79% | +0.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.57% | 0.16% | +0.41% |
Volatility
PBMR vs. PBAP - Volatility Comparison
PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - March (PBMR) has a higher volatility of 0.76% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) at 0.59%. This indicates that PBMR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PBMR | PBAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.76% | 0.59% | +0.17% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.39% | 2.01% | +1.38% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.31% | 3.12% | +1.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.60% | 7.09% | -0.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.60% | 7.09% | -0.49% |
PBMR vs. PBAP - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both PBMR and PBAP have an expense ratio of 0.50%.
Dividends
PBMR vs. PBAP - Dividend Comparison
Neither PBMR nor PBAP has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
PBMR and PBAP have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PBMR has higher volatility (0.76%) compared to PBAP (0.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBMR dropped -7.64% vs PBAP's -9.70%.
On 1-year performance, PBAP leads with 13.50% vs 13.38% for PBMR. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, PBAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PBAP has performed better with a 13.50% return vs 13.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PBMR and PBAP have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.
PBMR and PBAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
PBAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.35 vs 3.12), 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 PBMR and PBAP
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