PBQQ vs. PUSH
PBQQ (PGIM Laddered Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF) and PUSH (PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBQQ is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM, while PUSH is a Municipal Bonds fund actively managed by PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBQQ returned 20.98% vs 3.85% for PUSH. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PBQQ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for PUSH.
Performance
PBQQ vs. PUSH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PBQQ achieves a 9.10% return, which is significantly higher than PUSH's 1.32% return.
PBQQ
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 2.58%
- YTD
- 9.10%
- 6M
- 9.79%
- 1Y
- 20.98%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PUSH
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 1.32%
- 6M
- 1.66%
- 1Y
- 3.85%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBQQ vs. PUSH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PBQQ PGIM Laddered Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF | 9.10% | 15.44% |
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF | 1.32% | 4.11% |
Correlation
The correlation between PBQQ and PUSH is 0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2025 | 0.09 |
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
PBQQ vs. PUSH — Risk / Return Rank
PBQQ
PUSH
PBQQ vs. PUSH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Laddered Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF (PBQQ) and PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH). 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.
| PBQQ | PUSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.94 | 2.54 | +0.40 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.33 | 3.84 | +0.49 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.59 | 1.71 | -0.12 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.47 | 7.72 | -3.24 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 21.36 | 19.17 | +2.19 |
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
| PBQQ | PUSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.94 | 2.54 | +0.40 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.50 | 2.91 | -1.41 |
Drawdowns
PBQQ vs. PUSH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PBQQ drawdown since its inception was -12.92%, which is greater than PUSH's maximum drawdown of -0.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBQQ and PUSH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PBQQ | PUSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.92% | -0.85% | -12.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.71% | -0.50% | -4.21% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.21% | 0.00% | -0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.26% | -0.11% | -1.15% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.98% | 0.20% | +0.78% |
Volatility
PBQQ vs. PUSH - Volatility Comparison
PGIM Laddered Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF (PBQQ) has a higher volatility of 1.07% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) at 0.30%. This indicates that PBQQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PUSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PBQQ | PUSH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.07% | 0.30% | +0.77% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.51% | 0.98% | +4.53% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.18% | 1.52% | +5.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.88% | 1.30% | +10.58% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.88% | 1.30% | +10.58% |
PBQQ vs. PUSH - Expense Ratio Comparison
PBQQ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than PUSH's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
PBQQ vs. PUSH - Dividend Comparison
PBQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than PUSH's 3.23% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
PBQQ PGIM Laddered Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.00% |
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF | 3.23% | 3.45% | 1.86% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PBQQ and PUSH have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PBQQ has higher volatility (1.07%) compared to PUSH (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBQQ dropped -12.92% vs PUSH's -0.85%.
On 1-year performance, PBQQ leads with 20.98% vs 3.85% for PUSH. On fees, PUSH is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, PUSH has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PBQQ has performed better with a 20.98% return vs 3.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PUSH is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PBQQ.
PUSH has the higher dividend yield at 3.23%, compared with 0.01% for PBQQ.
PBQQ is categorized as Defined Outcome, while PUSH is Municipal Bonds. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBQQ and 0.15% for PUSH.
PBQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 2.54), 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 PBQQ and PUSH
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