PJBF vs. GVAL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PJBF (PGIM Jennison Better Future ETF) and GVAL (Cambria Global Value ETF) are both Global Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PJBF returned 17.44% vs 43.62% for GVAL. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PJBF charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.64%/yr for GVAL.

Performance

PJBF vs. GVAL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Jennison Better Future ETF (PJBF) and Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PJBF achieves a 8.51% return, which is significantly lower than GVAL's 17.40% return.

PJBF

• 1D: -2.90%
• 1M: 0.88%
• YTD: 8.51%
• 6M: 7.42%
• 1Y: 17.44%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GVAL

• 1D: -1.91%
• 1M: 4.28%
• YTD: 17.40%
• 6M: 17.33%
• 1Y: 43.62%
• 3Y*: 27.44%
• 5Y*: 14.14%
• 10Y*: 11.81%

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

PJBF vs. GVAL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PJBF PGIM Jennison Better Future ETF	8.51%	5.13%	19.91%	-0.80%
GVAL Cambria Global Value ETF	17.40%	55.87%	2.59%	2.56%

Correlation

The correlation between PJBF and GVAL is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 19, 2023	0.49

The correlation between PJBF and GVAL shifts across timeframes, from 0.49 (all time) to 0.64 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

PJBF vs. GVAL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PJBF	GVAL
Technology	40.0%	9.4%
Industrials	16.5%	3.6%
Consumer Cyclical	13.8%	2.7%
Communication Services	11.5%	4.3%
Healthcare	11.5%	-
Financial Services	2.5%	16.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.3%	1.8%
Utilities	2.0%	3.7%
Basic Materials	-	7.7%
Energy	-	6.8%
Real Estate	-	6.2%

Return for Risk

PJBF vs. GVAL — Risk / Return Rank

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

PJBF

PJBF Risk / Return Rank: 24
PJBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
PJBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 25
PJBF Omega Ratio Rank: 24
PJBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
PJBF Martin Ratio Rank: 25

GVAL

GVAL Risk / Return Rank: 84
GVAL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
GVAL Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
GVAL Omega Ratio Rank: 86
GVAL Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
GVAL Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

PJBF vs. GVAL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Jennison Better Future ETF (PJBF) and Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL). 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.

	PJBF	GVAL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.84	2.82	-1.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.28	3.72	-2.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	1.50	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.95	3.81	-2.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.02	14.52	-11.50

PJBF vs. GVAL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PJBF Sharpe Ratio is 0.84, which is lower than the GVAL Sharpe Ratio of 2.82. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PJBF and GVAL, 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

PJBF vs. GVAL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PJBF drawdown since its inception was -25.67%, smaller than the maximum GVAL drawdown of -46.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PJBF and GVAL.

Drawdown Indicators

	PJBF	GVAL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.67%	-46.82%	+21.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-18.41%	-11.50%	-6.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.72%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-30.83%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.82%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.45%	-2.31%	-1.14%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.25%	-13.82%	+8.57%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.78%	3.01%	+2.77%

Volatility

PJBF vs. GVAL - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Jennison Better Future ETF (PJBF) has a higher volatility of 8.41% compared to Cambria Global Value ETF (GVAL) at 6.37%. This indicates that PJBF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GVAL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PJBF	GVAL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.41%	6.37%	+2.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.32%	13.81%	+3.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	20.98%	15.55%	+5.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.87%	18.60%	+3.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.87%	19.00%	+2.87%

PJBF vs. GVAL - Expense Ratio Comparison

PJBF has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is lower than GVAL's 0.64% expense ratio.

Dividends

PJBF vs. GVAL - Dividend Comparison

PJBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.22%, less than GVAL's 2.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GVAL Cambria Global Value ETF	2.43%	2.93%	4.75%	6.12%	5.05%	2.97%	1.90%	2.84%	4.65%	2.00%	2.54%	2.11%
PJBF PGIM Jennison Better Future ETF	0.22%	0.24%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PJBF and GVAL in my portfolio?

PJBF and GVAL have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PJBF or GVAL?

PJBF has higher volatility (8.41%) compared to GVAL (6.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PJBF dropped -25.67% vs GVAL's -46.82%.

Which ETF is better, PJBF or GVAL?

On 1-year performance, GVAL leads with 43.62% vs 17.44% for PJBF. On fees, PJBF is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, GVAL has been the lower-risk option at 6.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PJBF or GVAL?

Over the 1-year period, GVAL has performed better with a 43.62% return vs 17.44%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PJBF or GVAL?

PJBF is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for GVAL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PJBF or GVAL?

GVAL has the higher dividend yield at 2.43%, compared with 0.22% for PJBF.

What is the main difference between PJBF and GVAL?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Cambria. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for PJBF and 0.64% for GVAL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GVAL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.82 vs 0.84), 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.