PMAU vs. EAPR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PMAU (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August) and EAPR (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. PMAU is actively managed, while EAPR is passively managed. A 0.50 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PMAU charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EAPR.

Performance

PMAU vs. EAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August (PMAU) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMAU achieves a 2.95% return, which is significantly lower than EAPR's 11.39% return.

PMAU

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.89%
• YTD: 2.95%
• 6M: 3.43%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EAPR

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: 2.01%
• YTD: 11.39%
• 6M: 12.25%
• 1Y: 22.07%
• 3Y*: 10.62%
• 5Y*: 5.15%
• 10Y*: —

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

PMAU vs. EAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PMAU PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August	2.95%	2.98%
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April	11.39%	6.03%

Correlation

The correlation between PMAU and EAPR is 0.50, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2025	0.50

Return for Risk

PMAU vs. EAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

EAPR

EAPR Risk / Return Rank: 94
EAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
EAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
EAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
EAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
EAPR Martin Ratio Rank: 97

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.

PMAU vs. EAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August (PMAU) and Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PMAU	EAPR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	3.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.51	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.90	0.54	+2.35

Drawdowns

PMAU vs. EAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMAU drawdown since its inception was -1.79%, smaller than the maximum EAPR drawdown of -17.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMAU and EAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PMAU	EAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.79%	-17.65%	+15.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-3.02%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.24%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-17.65%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	-0.45%	+0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.17%	-4.06%	+3.89%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.52%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PMAU	EAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.79%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	6.28%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.51%	7.24%	-4.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.51%	10.09%	-7.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.51%	10.02%	-7.51%

PMAU vs. EAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMAU has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than EAPR's 0.89% expense ratio.

Dividends

PMAU vs. EAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PMAU nor EAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PMAU and EAPR in my portfolio?

PMAU and EAPR have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PMAU or EAPR?

On fees, PMAU is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PMAU or EAPR?

PMAU is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for EAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PMAU or EAPR?

PMAU and EAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PMAU and EAPR?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMAU and 0.89% for EAPR.