PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RB vs. VB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RB vs. VB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) and Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RB achieves a 7.87% return, which is significantly lower than VB's 16.89% return.


RB

1D
-0.19%
1M
0.80%
YTD
7.87%
6M
7.69%
1Y
19.41%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

VB

1D
0.26%
1M
2.34%
YTD
16.89%
6M
14.71%
1Y
28.30%
3Y*
17.06%
5Y*
7.25%
10Y*
12.04%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RB vs. VB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between RB and VB is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.77

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025

0.77

The correlation between RB and VB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.77 - 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

RB vs. VB — Risk / Return Rank

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

RB
RB Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
RB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
RB Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
RB Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
RB Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

VB
VB Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
VB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VB Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
VB Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
VB Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
VB Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
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.

RB vs. VB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) and Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB). 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.


RBVBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+2.61

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.65

1.30

+0.35

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

9.27

3.19

+6.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

30.83

11.71

+19.13

RB vs. VB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RB Sharpe Ratio is 2.97, which is higher than the VB Sharpe Ratio of 1.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RB and VB, 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

RB vs. VB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RB drawdown since its inception was -2.09%, smaller than the maximum VB drawdown of -59.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RB and VB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RBVBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-2.09%

-59.56%

+57.47%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-2.09%

-8.98%

+6.89%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.36%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.05%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.56%

0.00%

-0.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.43%

-8.41%

+7.98%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.63%

2.44%

-1.81%

Volatility

RB vs. VB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) is 2.66%, while Vanguard Small-Cap ETF (VB) has a volatility of 4.86%. This indicates that RB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RBVBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.66%

4.86%

-2.20%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.75%

12.20%

-7.45%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.52%

16.59%

-10.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

6.52%

20.78%

-14.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

6.52%

21.39%

-14.87%

RB vs. VB - Expense Ratio Comparison

RB has a 0.58% expense ratio, which is higher than VB's 0.05% expense ratio.


Dividends

RB vs. VB - Dividend Comparison

RB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.27%, more than VB's 1.47% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
RB
ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF
2.27%1.78%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
VB
Vanguard Small-Cap ETF
1.47%1.33%1.30%1.55%1.59%1.24%1.14%1.39%1.67%1.35%1.50%1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


RB and VB 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.

VB has higher volatility (4.86%) compared to RB (2.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RB dropped -2.09% vs VB's -59.56%.

On 1-year performance, VB leads with 28.30% vs 19.41% for RB. On fees, VB is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, RB has been the lower-risk option at 2.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, VB has performed better with a 28.30% return vs 19.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VB is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RB.

RB has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 1.47% for VB.

RB is categorized as Defined Outcome, while VB is Small Cap Blend Equities. RB tracks Russell 2000, while VB tracks CRSP US Small Cap Index. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.58% for RB and 0.05% for VB.

RB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 vs 1.73), 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 RB and VB

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