QBSF vs. PMAU
QBSF (AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF) and PMAU (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QBSF charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMAU.
Performance
QBSF vs. PMAU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QBSF achieves a 2.42% return, which is significantly lower than PMAU's 2.95% return.
QBSF
- 1D
- 0.13%
- 1M
- 0.58%
- YTD
- 2.42%
- 6M
- 3.38%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PMAU
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.78%
- YTD
- 2.95%
- 6M
- 3.43%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QBSF vs. PMAU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QBSF AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF | 2.42% | 4.35% |
PMAU PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August | 2.95% | 2.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between QBSF and PMAU is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2025 | 0.83 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
QBSF vs. PMAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August (PMAU). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| QBSF | PMAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.89 | 2.89 | +0.01 |
Drawdowns
QBSF vs. PMAU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QBSF drawdown since its inception was -1.58%, smaller than the maximum PMAU drawdown of -1.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBSF and PMAU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QBSF | PMAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.58% | -1.79% | +0.21% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.07% | -0.02% | -0.05% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.22% | -0.17% | -0.05% |
Volatility
QBSF vs. PMAU - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QBSF | PMAU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.74% | 2.51% | +0.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.74% | 2.51% | +0.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.74% | 2.51% | +0.23% |
QBSF vs. PMAU - Expense Ratio Comparison
QBSF has a 0.64% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAU's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
QBSF vs. PMAU - Dividend Comparison
Neither QBSF nor PMAU has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
QBSF and PMAU have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PMAU is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PMAU is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for QBSF.
QBSF and PMAU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: AllianzIM and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for QBSF and 0.50% for PMAU.
Find the right allocation for QBSF and PMAU
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer