QCJA vs. PMAU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QCJA (FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January) and PMAU (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Their correlation of 0.86 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QCJA charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMAU.

Performance

QCJA vs. PMAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA) 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, QCJA achieves a 5.92% return, which is significantly higher than PMAU's 2.95% return.

QCJA

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: 2.12%
• YTD: 5.92%
• 6M: 6.91%
• 1Y: 15.75%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PMAU

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.89%
• YTD: 2.95%
• 6M: 3.43%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QCJA vs. PMAU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QCJA FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January	5.92%	6.38%
PMAU PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - August	2.95%	2.98%

Correlation

The correlation between QCJA and PMAU 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 4, 2025	0.86

Return for Risk

QCJA vs. PMAU — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCJA

QCJA Risk / Return Rank: 81
QCJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
QCJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
QCJA Omega Ratio Rank: 89
QCJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
QCJA Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

QCJA vs. PMAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA) 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.

	QCJA	PMAU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.00	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.18	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.46	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QCJA	PMAU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.74	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.31	2.90	-1.59

Drawdowns

QCJA vs. PMAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCJA drawdown since its inception was -10.67%, which is greater than PMAU's maximum drawdown of -1.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCJA and PMAU.

Drawdown Indicators

	QCJA	PMAU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.67%	-1.79%	-8.88%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.98%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.10%	-0.02%	-0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.19%	-0.17%	-1.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.02%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QCJA	PMAU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.83%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.62%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.78%	2.51%	+3.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.48%	2.51%	+6.97%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.48%	2.51%	+6.97%

QCJA vs. PMAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCJA has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAU's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

QCJA vs. PMAU - Dividend Comparison

Neither QCJA nor PMAU has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QCJA and PMAU in my portfolio?

QCJA and PMAU 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 ETF is better, QCJA or 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 is cheaper, QCJA or PMAU?

PMAU is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QCJA.

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

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

What is the main difference between QCJA and PMAU?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QCJA and 0.50% for PMAU.