PMFB vs. PQAP

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PMFB (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February) and PQAP (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds from PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PMFB returned 7.90% vs 20.94% for PQAP. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.50% expense ratio.

Performance

PMFB vs. PQAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) and PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMFB achieves a 2.52% return, which is significantly lower than PQAP's 11.74% return.

PMFB

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.18%
• YTD: 2.52%
• 6M: 2.66%
• 1Y: 7.90%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PQAP

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 11.74%
• 6M: 11.96%
• 1Y: 20.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PMFB vs. PQAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February	2.52%	6.39%
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	11.74%	13.08%

Correlation

The correlation between PMFB and PQAP is 0.82, 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	0.82
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2025	0.80

The correlation between PMFB and PQAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.82 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PMFB vs. PQAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

PMFB

PMFB Risk / Return Rank: 95
PMFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
PMFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
PMFB Martin Ratio Rank: 95

PQAP

PQAP Risk / Return Rank: 97
PQAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
PQAP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
PQAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

PMFB vs. PQAP - 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 PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP). 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.

	PMFB	PQAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.72	4.31	-0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.89	6.93	-1.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.84	2.06	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.92	9.80	-3.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	30.29	62.04	-31.75

PMFB vs. PQAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMFB Sharpe Ratio is 3.72, which is comparable to the PQAP Sharpe Ratio of 4.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMFB and PQAP, 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

PMFB vs. PQAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMFB drawdown since its inception was -2.94%, smaller than the maximum PQAP drawdown of -10.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMFB and PQAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	PMFB	PQAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.94%	-10.79%	+7.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.34%	-2.15%	+0.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	-0.44%	+0.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.37%	-0.61%	+0.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.26%	0.34%	-0.08%

Volatility

PMFB vs. PQAP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) is 0.60%, while PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) has a volatility of 2.45%. This indicates that PMFB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PQAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PMFB	PQAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.60%	2.45%	-1.85%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.52%	3.86%	-2.34%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.14%	4.89%	-2.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.76%	11.01%	-8.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.76%	11.01%	-8.25%

PMFB vs. PQAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both PMFB and PQAP have an expense ratio of 0.50%.

Dividends

PMFB vs. PQAP - Dividend Comparison

PMFB has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PQAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%.

Position	TTM	2025
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February	0.00%	0.00%
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	0.02%	0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PMFB and PQAP in my portfolio?

PMFB and PQAP have a correlation of 0.82, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PMFB or PQAP?

PQAP has higher volatility (2.45%) compared to PMFB (0.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMFB dropped -2.94% vs PQAP's -10.79%.

Which ETF is better, PMFB or PQAP?

On 1-year performance, PQAP leads with 20.94% vs 7.90% for PMFB. Both ETFs have the same 0.50% expense ratio. On volatility, PMFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PMFB or PQAP?

Over the 1-year period, PQAP has performed better with a 20.94% return vs 7.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PMFB or PQAP?

PMFB and PQAP have the same expense ratio: 0.50% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PMFB or PQAP?

PQAP has the higher dividend yield at 0.02%, compared with 0.00% for PMFB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PQAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.31 vs 3.72), 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.