PQAP vs. JULB

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

PQAP (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April) and JULB (Aptus July Buffer ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.85 means they have usually moved in the same direction. PQAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for JULB.

Performance

PQAP vs. JULB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) 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, PQAP achieves a 12.70% return, which is significantly higher than JULB's 9.76% return.

PQAP

• 1D: 0.03%
• 1M: 0.89%
• 6M: 12.27%
• YTD: 12.70%
• 1Y: 18.21%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.40%

JULB

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.62%
• 6M: 9.24%
• YTD: 9.76%
• 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	$187.20K	$174.05K	$238.03K
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	$46.01K	$49.92K	$129.72K

PQAP vs. JULB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	12.70%	2.38%
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	9.76%	2.44%

Correlation

The correlation between PQAP and JULB is 0.85, 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	0.85

Return for Risk

PQAP vs. JULB — Risk / Return Rank

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

PQAP

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

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.

PQAP vs. JULB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) 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.

	PQAP	JULB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.40	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.30	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.76	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.25	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	36.18	—	—

Drawdowns

PQAP vs. JULB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PQAP drawdown since its inception was -10.79%, which is greater than JULB's maximum drawdown of -5.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PQAP and JULB.

Drawdown Indicators

	PQAP	JULB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.79%	-5.24%	-5.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.52%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.64%	-0.77%	+0.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.50%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PQAP	JULB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.37%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.72%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.40%	6.86%	-1.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.81%	6.86%	+3.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.81%	6.86%	+3.95%

PQAP vs. JULB - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

PQAP vs. JULB - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025
JULB Aptus July Buffer ETF	0.00%	0.00%
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	0.02%	0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PQAP and JULB in my portfolio?

PQAP and JULB have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PQAP 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, PQAP or JULB?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between PQAP and JULB?

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