PMAP vs. BFJL

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

PMAP (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April) and BFJL (FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July) are both Defined Outcome funds. PMAP is actively managed, while BFJL is passively managed. Over the past year, PMAP returned 6.68% vs -13.79% for BFJL. Their 0.37 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PMAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for BFJL.

Performance

PMAP vs. BFJL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) and FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July (BFJL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMAP achieves a 4.09% return, which is significantly higher than BFJL's -4.00% return.

PMAP

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.49%
• 6M: 3.70%
• YTD: 4.09%
• 1Y: 6.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.06%

BFJL

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 1.35%
• 6M: 1.17%
• YTD: -4.00%
• 1Y: -13.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -10.21%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BFJL FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July	$5.79K	$7.86K	$4.98K
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April	$2.56K	$1.25K	$2.99K

PMAP vs. BFJL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April	4.09%	3.02%
BFJL FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July	-4.00%	-7.43%

Correlation

The correlation between PMAP and BFJL is 0.37, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2025	0.37

Return for Risk

PMAP vs. BFJL — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PMAP

PMAP Risk / Return Rank: 99
PMAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Martin Ratio Rank: 99

BFJL

BFJL Risk / Return Rank: 3
BFJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
BFJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
BFJL Omega Ratio Rank: 2
BFJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
BFJL Martin Ratio Rank: 5

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PMAP vs. BFJL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) and FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July (BFJL). 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.

	PMAP	BFJL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	5.72	-1.05	+6.77
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	11.18	-1.39	+12.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.58	0.83	+1.75
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	19.25	-0.65	+19.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	90.55	-0.87	+91.42

PMAP vs. BFJL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMAP Sharpe Ratio is 5.72, which is higher than the BFJL Sharpe Ratio of -1.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMAP and BFJL, 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

PMAP vs. BFJL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMAP drawdown since its inception was -1.75%, smaller than the maximum BFJL drawdown of -21.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMAP and BFJL.

Drawdown Indicators

	PMAP	BFJL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.75%	-21.27%	+19.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.35%	-21.27%	+20.92%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.04%	-18.06%	+18.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.08%	-12.96%	+12.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.07%	15.87%	-15.80%

Volatility

PMAP vs. BFJL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) is 0.35%, while FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July (BFJL) has a volatility of 3.39%. This indicates that PMAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BFJL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PMAP	BFJL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.35%	3.39%	-3.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.94%	5.12%	-4.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.18%	13.19%	-12.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.23%	13.12%	-10.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.23%	13.12%	-10.89%

PMAP vs. BFJL - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BFJL's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

PMAP vs. BFJL - Dividend Comparison

PMAP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BFJL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%.

Position	TTM	2025
BFJL FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - July	1.40%	1.35%
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PMAP and BFJL in my portfolio?

PMAP and BFJL have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PMAP or BFJL?

BFJL has higher volatility (3.39%) compared to PMAP (0.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMAP dropped -1.75% vs BFJL's -21.27%.

Which ETF is better, PMAP or BFJL?

On 1-year performance, PMAP leads with 6.68% vs -13.79% for BFJL. On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PMAP or BFJL?

Over the 1-year period, PMAP has performed better with a 6.68% return vs -13.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PMAP or BFJL?

PMAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BFJL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PMAP or BFJL?

BFJL has the higher dividend yield at 1.40%, compared with 0.00% for PMAP.

What is the main difference between PMAP and BFJL?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMAP and 0.90% for BFJL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.72 vs -1.05), 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.