RB vs. APXM

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

RB (ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF) and APXM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. RB is passively managed, while APXM is actively managed. Over the past year, RB returned 18.24% vs 4.93% for APXM. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RB charges 0.58%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for APXM.

Performance

RB vs. APXM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RB achieves a 7.90% return, which is significantly higher than APXM's 2.43% return.

RB

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.02%
• 6M: 5.39%
• YTD: 7.90%
• 1Y: 18.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

APXM

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 0.25%
• 6M: 2.23%
• YTD: 2.43%
• 1Y: 4.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RB vs. APXM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	7.90%	10.85%
APXM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April	2.43%	2.78%

Correlation

The correlation between RB and APXM is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.48

Return for Risk

RB vs. APXM — Risk / Return Rank

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

RB

RB Risk / Return Rank: 96
RB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
RB Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
RB Omega Ratio Rank: 95
RB Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
RB Martin Ratio Rank: 96

APXM

APXM Risk / Return Rank: 98
APXM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
APXM Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
APXM Omega Ratio Rank: 98
APXM Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
APXM Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

RB vs. APXM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM). 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.

	RB	APXM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.79	3.97	-1.18
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.74	6.46	-1.71
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	2.07	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.77	8.27	+0.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	28.21	50.04	-21.84

RB vs. APXM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RB Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is comparable to the APXM Sharpe Ratio of 3.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RB and APXM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

RB vs. APXM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RB drawdown since its inception was -2.09%, which is greater than APXM's maximum drawdown of -0.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RB and APXM.

Drawdown Indicators

	RB	APXM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-2.09%	-0.60%	-1.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.09%	-0.60%	-1.49%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.54%	-0.13%	-0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.44%	-0.05%	-0.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.65%	0.10%	+0.55%

Volatility

RB vs. APXM - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) has a higher volatility of 1.54% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM) at 0.60%. This indicates that RB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APXM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RB	APXM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.54%	0.60%	+0.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.74%	1.12%	+3.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.57%	1.25%	+5.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.46%	1.36%	+5.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.46%	1.36%	+5.10%

RB vs. APXM - Expense Ratio Comparison

RB has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is lower than APXM's 0.85% expense ratio.

Dividends

RB vs. APXM - Dividend Comparison

RB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%, while APXM has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
APXM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	2.27%	1.78%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RB and APXM in my portfolio?

RB and APXM have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RB or APXM?

RB has higher volatility (1.54%) compared to APXM (0.60%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RB dropped -2.09% vs APXM's -0.60%.

Which ETF is better, RB or APXM?

On 1-year performance, RB leads with 18.24% vs 4.93% for APXM. On fees, RB is cheaper at 0.58% per year. On volatility, APXM has been the lower-risk option at 0.60%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RB or APXM?

Over the 1-year period, RB has performed better with a 18.24% return vs 4.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RB or APXM?

RB is cheaper with a 0.58% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for APXM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RB or APXM?

RB has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 0.00% for APXM.

What is the main difference between RB and APXM?

They also come from different issuers: ProShares and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RB and 0.85% for APXM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

APXM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.97 vs 2.79), 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.