PMAP vs. GSG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PMAP (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both exchange-traded funds - PMAP is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM, while GSG is a Commodities fund tracking the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. PMAP is actively managed, while GSG is passively managed. Over the past year, PMAP returned 7.34% vs 51.52% for GSG. At a correlation of -0.14, they often move in opposite directions. PMAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.

Performance

PMAP vs. GSG - 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 iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMAP achieves a 3.28% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 42.58% return.

PMAP

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

GSG

• 1D: 0.77%
• 1M: -4.83%
• YTD: 42.58%
• 6M: 41.06%
• 1Y: 51.52%
• 3Y*: 19.31%
• 5Y*: 15.74%
• 10Y*: 7.69%

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

PMAP vs. GSG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April	3.28%	5.37%
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust	42.58%	1.27%

Correlation

The correlation between PMAP and GSG is -0.22, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025	-0.14

Return for Risk

PMAP vs. GSG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments 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

GSG

GSG Risk / Return Rank: 71
GSG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
GSG Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
GSG Omega Ratio Rank: 65
GSG Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
GSG Martin Ratio Rank: 75

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. GSG - 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 iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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.

	PMAP	GSG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	6.43	2.26	+4.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	13.39	2.88	+10.52
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.92	1.40	+1.51
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	21.40	5.47	+15.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	133.92	14.39	+119.52
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PMAP vs. GSG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMAP Sharpe Ratio is 6.43, which is higher than the GSG Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMAP and GSG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PMAP	GSG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.43	2.26	+4.17
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.70	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.35	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.23	-0.09	+3.32

Drawdowns

PMAP vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMAP drawdown since its inception was -1.75%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMAP and GSG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PMAP	GSG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.75%	-89.62%	+87.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.34%	-9.46%	+9.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.94%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-29.12%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-57.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.06%	-56.95%	+56.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.08%	-63.71%	+63.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.05%	3.59%	-3.54%

Volatility

PMAP vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) is 0.27%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 7.65%. This indicates that PMAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PMAP	GSG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.27%	7.65%	-7.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.81%	20.42%	-19.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.15%	22.95%	-21.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.33%	22.61%	-20.28%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.33%	22.03%	-19.70%

PMAP vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

PMAP vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison

Neither PMAP nor GSG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PMAP and GSG in my portfolio?

PMAP and GSG have a correlation of -0.22, 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 GSG?

GSG has higher volatility (7.65%) compared to PMAP (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMAP dropped -1.75% vs GSG's -89.62%.

Which ETF is better, PMAP or GSG?

On 1-year performance, GSG leads with 51.52% vs 7.34% for PMAP. On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, PMAP or GSG?

Over the 1-year period, GSG has performed better with a 51.52% return vs 7.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PMAP or GSG?

PMAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.

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

PMAP and GSG have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PMAP and GSG?

PMAP is categorized as Defined Outcome, while GSG is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMAP and 0.75% for GSG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.43 vs 2.26), 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.