PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QCJL vs. PBQQ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QCJL vs. PBQQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) and PGIM Laddered Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF (PBQQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QCJL achieves a 5.15% return, which is significantly lower than PBQQ's 9.10% return.


QCJL

1D
-0.06%
1M
1.24%
YTD
5.15%
6M
5.61%
1Y
14.69%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

PBQQ

1D
-0.21%
1M
2.58%
YTD
9.10%
6M
9.79%
1Y
20.98%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QCJL vs. PBQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QCJL and PBQQ is 0.89, 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

0.89

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2025

0.93

The correlation between QCJL and PBQQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

QCJL vs. PBQQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QCJL
QCJL Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
QCJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7878
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QCJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
QCJL Omega Ratio Rank: 8484
Omega Ratio Rank
QCJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
QCJL Martin Ratio Rank: 8787
Martin Ratio Rank

PBQQ
PBQQ Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
PBQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
PBQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 8383
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

QCJL vs. PBQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) and PGIM Laddered Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF (PBQQ). 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.


QCJLPBQQDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.51

2.94

-0.43

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.67

4.33

-0.66

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.51

1.59

-0.08

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

3.69

4.47

-0.78

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

18.73

21.36

-2.63

QCJL vs. PBQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QCJL Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is comparable to the PBQQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QCJL and PBQQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QCJLPBQQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.51

2.94

-0.43

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.29

1.50

-0.22

Drawdowns

QCJL vs. PBQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QCJL drawdown since its inception was -11.18%, smaller than the maximum PBQQ drawdown of -12.92%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QCJL and PBQQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QCJLPBQQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.18%

-12.92%

+1.74%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.00%

-4.71%

+0.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.06%

-0.21%

+0.15%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.07%

-1.26%

+0.19%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.79%

0.98%

-0.19%

Volatility

QCJL vs. PBQQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) is 0.39%, while PGIM Laddered Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF (PBQQ) has a volatility of 1.07%. This indicates that QCJL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QCJLPBQQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.39%

1.07%

-0.68%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.32%

5.51%

-1.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

5.89%

7.18%

-1.29%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.48%

11.88%

-2.40%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.48%

11.88%

-2.40%

QCJL vs. PBQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QCJL has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than PBQQ's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

QCJL vs. PBQQ - Dividend Comparison

QCJL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PBQQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.


Frequently Asked Questions


QCJL and PBQQ have a correlation of 0.89, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PBQQ has higher volatility (1.07%) compared to QCJL (0.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QCJL dropped -11.18% vs PBQQ's -12.92%.

On 1-year performance, PBQQ leads with 20.98% vs 14.69% for QCJL. On fees, PBQQ is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, QCJL has been the lower-risk option at 0.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, PBQQ has performed better with a 20.98% return vs 14.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PBQQ is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QCJL.

PBQQ has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for QCJL.

QCJL is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while PBQQ is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for QCJL and 0.50% for PBQQ.

PBQQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 2.51), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for QCJL and PBQQ

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