PQJA vs. FBUF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PQJA (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January) and FBUF (Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PQJA returned 20.07% vs 16.49% for FBUF. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. PQJA charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.48%/yr for FBUF.

Performance

PQJA vs. FBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January (PQJA) and Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PQJA achieves a 7.28% return, which is significantly higher than FBUF's 3.62% return.

PQJA

• 1D: -1.10%
• 1M: -0.49%
• YTD: 7.28%
• 6M: 7.53%
• 1Y: 20.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FBUF

• 1D: -0.89%
• 1M: -0.79%
• YTD: 3.62%
• 6M: 3.09%
• 1Y: 16.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PQJA vs. FBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PQJA PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January	7.28%	16.06%
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF	3.62%	14.01%

Correlation

The correlation between PQJA and FBUF is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2025	0.89

The correlation between PQJA and FBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.89 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PQJA vs. FBUF — Risk / Return Rank

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

PQJA

PQJA Risk / Return Rank: 79
PQJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 81
PQJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
PQJA Omega Ratio Rank: 85
PQJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
PQJA Martin Ratio Rank: 80

FBUF

FBUF Risk / Return Rank: 68
FBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
FBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
FBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 73
FBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
FBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 72

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. FBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January (PQJA) and Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF). 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.

	PQJA	FBUF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.36	2.05	+0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.31	2.74	+0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.40	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.98	2.95	+0.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.23	12.59	+1.64

PQJA vs. FBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PQJA Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is comparable to the FBUF Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PQJA and FBUF, 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

PQJA vs. FBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PQJA drawdown since its inception was -14.72%, which is greater than FBUF's maximum drawdown of -11.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PQJA and FBUF.

Drawdown Indicators

	PQJA	FBUF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.72%	-11.09%	-3.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.77%	-5.61%	-1.16%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	-1.83%	+0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.63%	-1.38%	-0.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.41%	1.31%	+0.10%

Volatility

PQJA vs. FBUF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January (PQJA) is 3.03%, while Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) has a volatility of 3.44%. This indicates that PQJA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PQJA	FBUF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.03%	3.44%	-0.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.18%	6.11%	+1.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.58%	8.11%	+0.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.40%	9.69%	+3.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.40%	9.69%	+3.71%

PQJA vs. FBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

PQJA has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than FBUF's 0.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

PQJA vs. FBUF - Dividend Comparison

PQJA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FBUF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.60%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
FBUF Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF	0.60%	0.64%	0.54%
PQJA PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January	0.00%	0.01%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PQJA and FBUF in my portfolio?

PQJA and FBUF have a correlation of 0.86, 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 FBUF?

FBUF has higher volatility (3.44%) compared to PQJA (3.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PQJA dropped -14.72% vs FBUF's -11.09%.

Which ETF is better, PQJA or FBUF?

On 1-year performance, PQJA leads with 20.07% vs 16.49% for FBUF. On fees, FBUF is cheaper at 0.48% per year. On volatility, PQJA has been the lower-risk option at 3.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PQJA or FBUF?

Over the 1-year period, PQJA has performed better with a 20.07% return vs 16.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PQJA or FBUF?

FBUF is cheaper with a 0.48% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PQJA.

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

FBUF has the higher dividend yield at 0.60%, compared with 0.00% for PQJA.

What is the main difference between PQJA and FBUF?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PQJA and 0.48% for FBUF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PQJA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.36 vs 2.05), 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.