RULE vs. PBL

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

RULE (Adaptive Core ETF) and PBL (PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, RULE returned 21.26%/yr vs 14.40%/yr for PBL. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RULE charges 1.10%/yr vs 0.45%/yr for PBL.

Performance

RULE vs. PBL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) and PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RULE achieves a 49.82% return, which is significantly higher than PBL's 7.15% return.

RULE

• 1D: 2.20%
• 1M: 13.27%
• YTD: 49.82%
• 6M: 47.98%
• 1Y: 57.12%
• 3Y*: 21.26%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PBL

• 1D: -0.17%
• 1M: 0.73%
• YTD: 7.15%
• 6M: 6.87%
• 1Y: 18.53%
• 3Y*: 14.40%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RULE vs. PBL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
RULE Adaptive Core ETF	49.82%	4.60%	7.59%	6.29%	0.16%
PBL PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF	7.15%	12.35%	16.70%	14.28%	-4.02%

Correlation

The correlation between RULE and PBL is 0.75, 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	0.75
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2022	0.76

The correlation between RULE and PBL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.75 to 0.81 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RULE vs. PBL — Risk / Return Rank

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

RULE

RULE Risk / Return Rank: 81
RULE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
RULE Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
RULE Omega Ratio Rank: 78
RULE Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
RULE Martin Ratio Rank: 86

PBL

PBL Risk / Return Rank: 64
PBL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 62
PBL Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
PBL Omega Ratio Rank: 59
PBL Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
PBL Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

RULE vs. PBL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) and PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL). 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.

	RULE	PBL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.52	2.00	+0.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.23	2.81	+0.42
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.35	+0.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.54	3.20	+1.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.58	12.53	+5.04

RULE vs. PBL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RULE Sharpe Ratio is 2.52, which is comparable to the PBL Sharpe Ratio of 2.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RULE and PBL, 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

RULE vs. PBL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RULE drawdown since its inception was -30.48%, which is greater than PBL's maximum drawdown of -11.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RULE and PBL.

Drawdown Indicators

	RULE	PBL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-30.48%	-11.69%	-18.79%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.65%	-5.82%	-6.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.21%	-11.69%	-8.52%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.90%	+0.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.85%	-1.66%	-13.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.26%	1.48%	+1.78%

Volatility

RULE vs. PBL - Volatility Comparison

Adaptive Core ETF (RULE) has a higher volatility of 11.94% compared to PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF (PBL) at 3.41%. This indicates that RULE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RULE	PBL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.94%	3.41%	+8.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.18%	7.06%	+13.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.87%	9.33%	+13.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.56%	9.91%	+5.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.56%	9.91%	+5.65%

RULE vs. PBL - Expense Ratio Comparison

RULE has a 1.10% expense ratio, which is higher than PBL's 0.45% expense ratio.

Dividends

RULE vs. PBL - Dividend Comparison

RULE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PBL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.07%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
PBL PGIM Portfolio Ballast ETF	2.07%	2.21%	6.89%	7.92%	0.16%
RULE Adaptive Core ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	2.01%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RULE and PBL in my portfolio?

RULE and PBL have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RULE or PBL?

RULE has higher volatility (11.94%) compared to PBL (3.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RULE dropped -30.48% vs PBL's -11.69%.

Which ETF is better, RULE or PBL?

On 3-year performance, RULE leads with 21.26% vs 14.40% for PBL. On fees, PBL is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, PBL has been the lower-risk option at 3.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RULE or PBL?

Over the 3-year period, RULE has performed better with a 21.26% return vs 14.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RULE or PBL?

PBL is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 1.10% for RULE.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RULE or PBL?

PBL has the higher dividend yield at 2.07%, compared with 0.00% for RULE.

What is the main difference between RULE and PBL?

They also come from different issuers: Mohr Funds and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 1.10% for RULE and 0.45% for PBL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RULE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.52 vs 2.00), 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.