PMFB vs. CBXA
PMFB (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February) and CBXA (Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. PMFB is actively managed, while CBXA is passively managed. Over the past year, PMFB returned 8.06% vs -21.42% for CBXA. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PMFB charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CBXA.
Performance
PMFB vs. CBXA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PMFB achieves a 2.56% return, which is significantly higher than CBXA's -20.06% return.
PMFB
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.80%
- YTD
- 2.56%
- 6M
- 3.26%
- 1Y
- 8.06%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CBXA
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- -5.65%
- YTD
- -20.06%
- 6M
- -21.86%
- 1Y
- -21.42%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PMFB vs. CBXA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February | 2.56% | 8.70% |
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | -20.06% | 9.67% |
Correlation
The correlation between PMFB and CBXA is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2025 | 0.42 |
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
PMFB vs. CBXA — Risk / Return Rank
PMFB
CBXA
PMFB vs. CBXA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) and Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA). 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.
| PMFB | CBXA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.83 | -1.20 | +5.02 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 6.15 | -1.61 | +7.76 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.88 | 0.80 | +1.08 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.04 | -0.79 | +6.83 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 31.52 | -1.52 | +33.04 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PMFB | CBXA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.83 | -1.20 | +5.02 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.43 | -0.63 | +3.07 |
Drawdowns
PMFB vs. CBXA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PMFB drawdown since its inception was -2.94%, smaller than the maximum CBXA drawdown of -27.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMFB and CBXA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PMFB | CBXA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.94% | -27.22% | +24.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.34% | -27.22% | +25.88% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.06% | -27.22% | +27.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.37% | -8.69% | +8.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.26% | 14.07% | -13.81% |
Volatility
PMFB vs. CBXA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) is 0.37%, while Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA) has a volatility of 2.81%. This indicates that PMFB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CBXA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PMFB | CBXA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.37% | 2.81% | -2.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.43% | 15.53% | -14.10% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.12% | 17.98% | -15.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.77% | 17.13% | -14.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.77% | 17.13% | -14.36% |
PMFB vs. CBXA - Expense Ratio Comparison
PMFB has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CBXA's 0.69% expense ratio.
Dividends
PMFB vs. CBXA - Dividend Comparison
PMFB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBXA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | 2.47% | 1.97% |
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PMFB and CBXA have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CBXA has higher volatility (2.81%) compared to PMFB (0.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMFB dropped -2.94% vs CBXA's -27.22%.
On 1-year performance, PMFB leads with 8.06% vs -21.42% for CBXA. On fees, PMFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PMFB has performed better with a 8.06% return vs -21.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PMFB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBXA.
CBXA has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 0.00% for PMFB.
They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMFB and 0.69% for CBXA.
PMFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.83 vs -1.20), 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.
Find the right allocation for PMFB and CBXA
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