PMJA vs. JULB

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

PMJA (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January) and JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.91 means they have usually moved in the same direction. PMJA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for JULB.

Performance

PMJA vs. JULB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January (PMJA) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMJA achieves a 3.20% return, which is significantly lower than JULB's 8.79% return.

PMJA

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 0.69%
• 6M: 2.64%
• YTD: 3.20%
• 1Y: 6.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.32%

JULB

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: 1.23%
• 6M: 7.52%
• YTD: 8.79%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	$147.19K	$170.46K	$229.15K
PMJA PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January	$3.57K	$1.92K	$2.93K

PMJA vs. JULB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PMJA PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January	3.20%	1.69%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	8.79%	2.44%

Correlation

The correlation between PMJA and JULB is 0.91, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 14, 2025	0.91

Return for Risk

PMJA vs. JULB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PMJA

PMJA Risk / Return Rank: 96
PMJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
PMJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PMJA Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PMJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
PMJA Martin Ratio Rank: 95

JULB

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

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PMJA vs. JULB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - January (PMJA) and Aptus July Buffer ETF (JULB). 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.

	PMJA	JULB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.40	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.43	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.75	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.71	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.28	—	—

Drawdowns

PMJA vs. JULB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMJA drawdown since its inception was -2.98%, smaller than the maximum JULB drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMJA and JULB.

Drawdown Indicators

	PMJA	JULB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.98%	-5.24%	+2.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.32%	-0.78%	+0.46%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.29%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PMJA	JULB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.50%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.55%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.02%	6.83%	-4.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.76%	6.83%	-4.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.76%	6.83%	-4.07%

PMJA vs. JULB - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMJA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than JULB's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

PMJA vs. JULB - Dividend Comparison

Neither PMJA nor JULB has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PMJA and JULB in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, PMJA and JULB move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, PMJA or JULB?

On fees, JULB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PMJA or JULB?

JULB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PMJA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PMJA or JULB?

PMJA and JULB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PMJA and JULB?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Aptus. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMJA and 0.25% for JULB.