RSJN vs. PBFR
RSJN (FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - June) and PBFR (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RSJN returned 13.82% vs 12.83% for PBFR. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RSJN charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBFR.
Performance
RSJN vs. PBFR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RSJN achieves a 6.92% return, which is significantly higher than PBFR's 4.52% return.
RSJN
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 2.48%
- YTD
- 6.92%
- 6M
- 7.65%
- 1Y
- 13.82%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PBFR
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 1.58%
- YTD
- 4.52%
- 6M
- 5.34%
- 1Y
- 12.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RSJN vs. PBFR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
RSJN FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - June | 6.92% | 7.86% | 5.05% |
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF | 4.52% | 10.44% | 5.27% |
Correlation
The correlation between RSJN and PBFR is 0.76, 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 | 0.76 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2024 | 0.74 |
The correlation between RSJN and PBFR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.76 - 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
RSJN vs. PBFR — Risk / Return Rank
RSJN
PBFR
RSJN vs. PBFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - June (RSJN) 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.
| RSJN | PBFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.94 | 2.99 | -1.05 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.86 | 4.36 | -1.50 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.66 | -0.30 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.41 | 4.57 | -1.17 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.31 | 24.09 | -10.77 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| RSJN | PBFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.94 | 2.99 | -1.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.03 | 1.54 | -0.51 |
Drawdowns
RSJN vs. PBFR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RSJN drawdown since its inception was -12.44%, which is greater than PBFR's maximum drawdown of -8.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSJN and PBFR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RSJN | PBFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.44% | -8.50% | -3.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -4.07% | -2.82% | -1.25% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.04% | -0.16% | +0.12% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.58% | -0.63% | -0.95% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.04% | 0.53% | +0.51% |
Volatility
RSJN vs. PBFR - Volatility Comparison
FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - June (RSJN) has a higher volatility of 1.17% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) at 0.64%. This indicates that RSJN'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
| RSJN | PBFR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.17% | 0.64% | +0.53% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.89% | 3.34% | +1.55% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.21% | 4.33% | +2.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.15% | 6.89% | +3.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.15% | 6.89% | +3.26% |
RSJN vs. PBFR - Expense Ratio Comparison
RSJN has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PBFR's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
RSJN vs. PBFR - Dividend Comparison
RSJN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PBFR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.01% |
RSJN FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - June | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RSJN and PBFR have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RSJN has higher volatility (1.17%) compared to PBFR (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSJN dropped -12.44% vs PBFR's -8.50%.
On 1-year performance, RSJN leads with 13.82% vs 12.83% for PBFR. On fees, PBFR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PBFR has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RSJN has performed better with a 13.82% return vs 12.83%. 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 0.85% for RSJN.
PBFR has the higher dividend yield at 0.01%, compared with 0.00% for RSJN.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for RSJN and 0.50% for PBFR.
PBFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 1.94), 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.
Find the right allocation for RSJN 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