PMJN vs. CBXA

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

PMJN (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June) and CBXA (Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. PMJN is actively managed, while CBXA is passively managed. Over the past year, PMJN returned 5.27% vs -25.28% for CBXA. Their 0.41 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PMJN charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CBXA.

Performance

PMJN vs. CBXA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June (PMJN) and Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMJN achieves a 2.47% return, which is significantly higher than CBXA's -20.83% return.

PMJN

• 1D: 0.21%
• 1M: 0.38%
• 6M: 1.99%
• YTD: 2.47%
• 1Y: 5.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.86%

CBXA

• 1D: -1.08%
• 1M: 0.89%
• 6M: -18.90%
• YTD: -20.83%
• 1Y: -25.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -10.19%

*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)
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	$43.82K	$66.75K	$66.82K
PMJN PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June	$32.44K	$201.78K	$172.01K

PMJN vs. CBXA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PMJN PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June	2.47%	4.26%
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	-20.83%	-1.84%

Correlation

The correlation between PMJN and CBXA is 0.42, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 2, 2025	0.41

Return for Risk

PMJN vs. CBXA — Risk / Return Rank

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

PMJN

PMJN Risk / Return Rank: 94
PMJN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
PMJN Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
PMJN Omega Ratio Rank: 95
PMJN Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
PMJN Martin Ratio Rank: 96

CBXA

CBXA Risk / Return Rank: 1
CBXA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
CBXA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
CBXA Omega Ratio Rank: 0
CBXA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBXA Martin Ratio Rank: 1

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.

PMJN vs. CBXA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June (PMJN) 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.

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.

	PMJN	CBXA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.55	-1.43	+3.98
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.96	-2.00	+5.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	0.76	+0.82
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.55	-0.88	+5.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.34	-1.45	+23.79

PMJN vs. CBXA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMJN Sharpe Ratio is 2.55, which is higher than the CBXA Sharpe Ratio of -1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMJN and CBXA, 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

PMJN vs. CBXA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMJN drawdown since its inception was -1.15%, smaller than the maximum CBXA drawdown of -29.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMJN and CBXA.

Drawdown Indicators

	PMJN	CBXA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.15%	-29.68%	+28.53%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.15%	-29.68%	+28.53%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.09%	-27.92%	+27.83%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.11%	-10.99%	+10.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.23%	17.94%	-17.71%

Volatility

PMJN vs. CBXA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June (PMJN) is 0.73%, while Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA) has a volatility of 3.14%. This indicates that PMJN 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.

Volatility by Period

	PMJN	CBXA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.73%	3.14%	-2.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.81%	13.27%	-11.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.05%	18.25%	-16.20%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.96%	16.59%	-14.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.96%	16.59%	-14.63%

PMJN vs. CBXA - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMJN has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CBXA's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

PMJN vs. CBXA - Dividend Comparison

PMJN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CBXA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.49%.

Position	TTM	2025
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	2.49%	1.97%
PMJN PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PMJN and CBXA in my portfolio?

PMJN and CBXA have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PMJN or CBXA?

CBXA has higher volatility (3.14%) compared to PMJN (0.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMJN dropped -1.15% vs CBXA's -29.68%.

Which ETF is better, PMJN or CBXA?

On 1-year performance, PMJN leads with 5.27% vs -25.28% for CBXA. On fees, PMJN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMJN has been the lower-risk option at 0.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PMJN or CBXA?

Over the 1-year period, PMJN has performed better with a 5.27% return vs -25.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PMJN or CBXA?

PMJN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBXA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PMJN or CBXA?

CBXA has the higher dividend yield at 2.49%, compared with 0.00% for PMJN.

What is the main difference between PMJN and CBXA?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMJN and 0.69% for CBXA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMJN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.55 vs -1.43), 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.