PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QMFE vs. PBFR
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QMFE vs. PBFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February (QMFE) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QMFE achieves a 8.97% return, which is significantly higher than PBFR's 4.45% return.


QMFE

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.33%
YTD
8.97%
6M
9.02%
1Y
19.86%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

PBFR

1D
-0.13%
1M
0.30%
YTD
4.45%
6M
4.57%
1Y
12.60%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QMFE vs. PBFR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QMFE and PBFR 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 Feb 24, 2025

0.88

The correlation between QMFE and PBFR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.88 - 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

QMFE vs. PBFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

QMFE
QMFE Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
QMFE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMFE Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMFE Omega Ratio Rank: 9191
Omega Ratio Rank
QMFE Calmar Ratio Rank: 8181
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMFE Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
Martin Ratio Rank

PBFR
PBFR Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
PBFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBFR Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
PBFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8585
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBFR Martin Ratio Rank: 9393
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.

QMFE vs. PBFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February (QMFE) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). 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.


QMFEPBFRDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.10

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.16

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.58

1.64

-0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.15

4.49

-0.34

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

23.11

23.30

-0.19

QMFE vs. PBFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QMFE Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is comparable to the PBFR Sharpe Ratio of 2.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QMFE and PBFR, 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...

Drawdowns

QMFE vs. PBFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QMFE drawdown since its inception was -11.85%, which is greater than PBFR's maximum drawdown of -8.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QMFE and PBFR.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QMFEPBFRDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-11.85%

-8.50%

-3.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.81%

-2.82%

-1.99%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.43%

-0.29%

-0.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.10%

-0.63%

-0.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.86%

0.54%

+0.32%

Volatility

QMFE vs. PBFR - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February (QMFE) has a higher volatility of 2.19% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) at 1.27%. This indicates that QMFE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QMFEPBFRDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.19%

1.27%

+0.92%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.85%

3.51%

+2.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

7.10%

4.35%

+2.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.60%

6.86%

+4.74%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.60%

6.86%

+4.74%

QMFE vs. PBFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

QMFE has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than PBFR's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

QMFE vs. PBFR - Dividend Comparison

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


PositionTTM20252024
PBFR
PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF
0.01%0.01%0.01%
QMFE
FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - February
0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


QMFE and PBFR 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.

QMFE has higher volatility (2.19%) compared to PBFR (1.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QMFE dropped -11.85% vs PBFR's -8.50%.

On 1-year performance, QMFE leads with 19.86% vs 12.60% for PBFR. On fees, PBFR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBFR has been the lower-risk option at 1.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, QMFE has performed better with a 19.86% return vs 12.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PBFR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for QMFE.

PBFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for QMFE.

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

PBFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 vs 2.81), 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 QMFE and PBFR

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