PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PMAP vs. FBUF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PMAP vs. FBUF - 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 Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMAP achieves a 3.28% return, which is significantly lower than FBUF's 5.32% return.


PMAP

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.59%
YTD
3.28%
6M
3.83%
1Y
7.34%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

FBUF

1D
-0.12%
1M
2.85%
YTD
5.32%
6M
6.28%
1Y
19.61%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PMAP vs. FBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between PMAP and FBUF is 0.83, 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

0.83

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025

0.83

The correlation between PMAP and FBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.83 - 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

PMAP vs. FBUF — Risk / Return Rank

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

PMAP
PMAP Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
PMAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
PMAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank

FBUF
FBUF Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
FBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
FBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
FBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7070
Calmar Ratio Rank
FBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PMAP vs. FBUF - 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 Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). 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.


PMAPFBUFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+3.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+9.84

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.92

1.53

+1.39

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

21.40

3.51

+17.89

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

133.92

15.68

+118.24

PMAP vs. FBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMAP Sharpe Ratio is 6.43, which is higher than the FBUF Sharpe Ratio of 2.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMAP and FBUF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PMAPFBUFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.43

2.63

+3.80

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

3.23

1.47

+1.76

Drawdowns

PMAP vs. FBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMAP drawdown since its inception was -1.75%, smaller than the maximum FBUF drawdown of -11.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMAP and FBUF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PMAPFBUFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.75%

-11.09%

+9.34%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.34%

-5.61%

+5.27%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.06%

-0.22%

+0.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.08%

-1.38%

+1.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.05%

1.25%

-1.20%

Volatility

PMAP vs. FBUF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) is 0.27%, while Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) has a volatility of 1.11%. This indicates that PMAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PMAPFBUFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.27%

1.11%

-0.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.81%

5.37%

-4.56%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.15%

7.49%

-6.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.33%

9.55%

-7.22%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.33%

9.55%

-7.22%

PMAP vs. FBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBUF's 0.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

PMAP vs. FBUF - Dividend Comparison

PMAP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.63%.


PositionTTM20252024
FBUF
Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF
0.63%0.64%0.54%
PMAP
PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April
0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


PMAP and FBUF have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FBUF has higher volatility (1.11%) compared to PMAP (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMAP dropped -1.75% vs FBUF's -11.09%.

On 1-year performance, FBUF leads with 19.61% vs 7.34% for PMAP. On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, PMAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FBUF has performed better with a 19.61% return vs 7.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PMAP.

FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.63%, compared with 0.00% for PMAP.

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMAP and 0.48% for FBUF.

PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.43 vs 2.63), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PMAP and FBUF

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