PQJA vs. DAPR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PQJA (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January) and DAPR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. PQJA is actively managed, while DAPR is passively managed. Over the past year, PQJA returned 22.65% vs 10.07% for DAPR. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PQJA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for DAPR.

Performance

PQJA vs. DAPR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January (PQJA) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April (DAPR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PQJA achieves a 8.72% return, which is significantly higher than DAPR's 4.04% return.

PQJA

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 3.19%
• YTD: 8.72%
• 6M: 10.05%
• 1Y: 22.65%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

DAPR

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 1.93%
• YTD: 4.04%
• 6M: 4.78%
• 1Y: 10.07%
• 3Y*: 10.83%
• 5Y*: 6.20%
• 10Y*: —

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

PQJA vs. DAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PQJA PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January	8.72%	16.94%
DAPR FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April	4.04%	5.78%

Correlation

The correlation between PQJA and DAPR is 0.72, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2025	0.78

The correlation between PQJA and DAPR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PQJA vs. DAPR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PQJA

PQJA Risk / Return Rank: 82
PQJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
PQJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
PQJA Omega Ratio Rank: 88
PQJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
PQJA Martin Ratio Rank: 82

DAPR

DAPR Risk / Return Rank: 96
DAPR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
DAPR Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
DAPR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
DAPR Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
DAPR 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.

PQJA vs. DAPR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January (PQJA) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April (DAPR). 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.

	PQJA	DAPR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.77	3.66	-0.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.93	5.98	-2.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.81	-0.26
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.36	11.99	-8.63
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.33	59.41	-43.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PQJA vs. DAPR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PQJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.77, which is comparable to the DAPR Sharpe Ratio of 3.66. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PQJA and DAPR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PQJA	DAPR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.77	3.66	-0.89
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.76	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.39	0.77	+0.62

Drawdowns

PQJA vs. DAPR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PQJA drawdown since its inception was -14.72%, which is greater than DAPR's maximum drawdown of -10.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PQJA and DAPR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PQJA	DAPR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.72%	-10.51%	-4.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.77%	-0.84%	-5.93%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.51%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-10.51%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.09%	-0.12%	+0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.65%	-2.30%	+0.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.39%	0.17%	+1.22%

Volatility

PQJA vs. DAPR - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January (PQJA) has a higher volatility of 1.20% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Deep Buffer ETF - April (DAPR) at 1.03%. This indicates that PQJA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PQJA	DAPR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.20%	1.03%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.66%	1.88%	+4.78%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.24%	2.78%	+5.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.42%	8.21%	+5.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.42%	8.16%	+5.26%

PQJA vs. DAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PQJA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than DAPR's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

PQJA vs. DAPR - Dividend Comparison

Neither PQJA nor DAPR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PQJA and DAPR in my portfolio?

PQJA and DAPR have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PQJA or DAPR?

PQJA has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to DAPR (1.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PQJA dropped -14.72% vs DAPR's -10.51%.

Which ETF is better, PQJA or DAPR?

On 1-year performance, PQJA leads with 22.65% vs 10.07% for DAPR. On fees, PQJA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, DAPR has been the lower-risk option at 1.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PQJA or DAPR?

Over the 1-year period, PQJA has performed better with a 22.65% return vs 10.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PQJA or DAPR?

PQJA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for DAPR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PQJA or DAPR?

PQJA and DAPR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PQJA and DAPR?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and FT Vest. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PQJA and 0.85% for DAPR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.66 vs 2.77), 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.