RSMR vs. PQJA
RSMR (FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - March) and PQJA (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January) are both Defined Outcome funds. RSMR is passively managed, while PQJA is actively managed. Over the past year, RSMR returned 12.85% vs 19.19% for PQJA. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RSMR charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PQJA.
Performance
RSMR vs. PQJA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with RSMR having a 7.95% return and PQJA slightly higher at 8.22%.
RSMR
- 1D
- 0.09%
- 1M
- 1.45%
- 6M
- 7.95%
- YTD
- 7.95%
- 1Y
- 12.85%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PQJA
- 1D
- -0.40%
- 1M
- -0.55%
- 6M
- 8.22%
- YTD
- 8.22%
- 1Y
- 19.19%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
RSMR vs. PQJA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RSMR FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - March | 7.95% | 8.19% |
PQJA PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January | 8.22% | 19.71% |
Correlation
The correlation between RSMR and PQJA is 0.67, 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 | 0.67 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025 | 0.69 |
The correlation between RSMR and PQJA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.69 - 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
RSMR vs. PQJA — Risk / Return Rank
RSMR
PQJA
RSMR vs. PQJA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - March (RSMR) and PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January (PQJA). 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.
| RSMR | PQJA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.31 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.37 | 1.44 | -0.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.83 | 2.85 | +0.98 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 15.37 | 13.52 | +1.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RSMR vs. PQJA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RSMR drawdown since its inception was -9.09%, smaller than the maximum PQJA drawdown of -14.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSMR and PQJA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RSMR | PQJA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.09% | -14.72% | +5.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.37% | -6.77% | +3.40% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.56% | +0.56% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.80% | -1.61% | +0.81% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.84% | 1.42% | -0.58% |
Volatility
RSMR vs. PQJA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Vest U.S. Equity Equal Weight Buffer ETF - March (RSMR) is 1.78%, while PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - January (PQJA) has a volatility of 3.15%. This indicates that RSMR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PQJA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RSMR | PQJA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.78% | 3.15% | -1.37% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 4.72% | 7.24% | -2.52% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.64% | 8.55% | -1.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.39% | 13.32% | -2.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.39% | 13.32% | -2.93% |
RSMR vs. PQJA - Expense Ratio Comparison
RSMR has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than PQJA's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
RSMR vs. PQJA - Dividend Comparison
Neither RSMR nor PQJA has paid dividends to shareholders.
Frequently Asked Questions
RSMR and PQJA have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PQJA has higher volatility (3.15%) compared to RSMR (1.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSMR dropped -9.09% vs PQJA's -14.72%.
On 1-year performance, PQJA leads with 19.19% vs 12.85% for RSMR. On fees, PQJA is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, RSMR has been the lower-risk option at 1.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PQJA has performed better with a 19.19% return vs 12.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PQJA is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for RSMR.
RSMR and PQJA have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for RSMR and 0.50% for PQJA.
PQJA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.95), 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 RSMR and PQJA
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