QBSF vs. PMAU

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

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. Over the past year, QBSF returned 7.69% vs 7.00% for PMAU. Their 0.77 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. QBSF charges 0.64%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMAU.

Performance

QBSF vs. PMAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF (QBSF) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August (PMAU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBSF achieves a 3.20% return, which is significantly lower than PMAU's 3.90% return.

QBSF

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: 0.56%
• 6M: 2.73%
• YTD: 3.20%
• 1Y: 7.69%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.51%

PMAU

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.49%
• 6M: 3.48%
• YTD: 3.90%
• 1Y: 7.00%
• 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)
PMAU PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August	$48.78K	$23.35K	$8.53K
QBSF AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF	$362.72K	$551.94K	$623.95K

QBSF vs. PMAU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QBSF AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer15 ETF	3.20%	3.97%
PMAU PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August	3.90%	2.94%

Correlation

The correlation between QBSF and PMAU is 0.77, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2025	0.77

Return for Risk

QBSF vs. PMAU — Risk / Return Rank

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

QBSF

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

PMAU

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.

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.

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.

	QBSF	PMAU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.65	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.06	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.63	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.56	—	—

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	QBSF	PMAU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.58%	-1.79%	+0.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.58%	-1.79%	+0.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.20%	-0.15%	-0.05%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.42%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QBSF	PMAU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.88%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.93%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.77%	2.35%	+0.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.69%	2.35%	+0.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.69%	2.35%	+0.34%

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.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QBSF and PMAU in my portfolio?

QBSF and PMAU have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QBSF or PMAU?

On 1-year performance, QBSF leads with 7.69% vs 7.00% for PMAU. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, QBSF or PMAU?

Over the 1-year period, QBSF has performed better with a 7.69% return vs 7.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QBSF or PMAU?

PMAU is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.64% for QBSF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QBSF or PMAU?

QBSF and PMAU have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QBSF and PMAU?

They also come from different issuers: Allianz and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.64% for QBSF and 0.50% for PMAU.