TLTW vs. APRP
TLTW (iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond BuyWrite Strategy ETF) and APRP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April) are both Options Trading funds. TLTW is passively managed, while APRP is actively managed. Over the past year, TLTW returned 10.46% vs 17.90% for APRP. At a 0.21 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TLTW charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for APRP.
Performance
TLTW vs. APRP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TLTW achieves a 1.21% return, which is significantly lower than APRP's 9.34% return.
TLTW
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- 0.76%
- YTD
- 1.21%
- 6M
- -0.20%
- 1Y
- 10.46%
- 3Y*
- 0.74%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
APRP
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 1.87%
- YTD
- 9.34%
- 6M
- 10.32%
- 1Y
- 17.90%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
TLTW vs. APRP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
TLTW iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond BuyWrite Strategy ETF | 1.21% | 11.36% | 0.25% |
APRP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April | 9.34% | 7.80% | 10.28% |
Correlation
The correlation between TLTW and APRP is 0.25, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.25 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024 | 0.21 |
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
TLTW vs. APRP — Risk / Return Rank
TLTW
APRP
TLTW vs. APRP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond BuyWrite Strategy ETF (TLTW) and PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP). 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.
| TLTW | APRP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.79 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -5.15 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.24 | 2.04 | -0.80 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.76 | 16.51 | -14.75 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.28 | 73.52 | -68.24 |
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
| TLTW | APRP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.37 | 4.15 | -2.79 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.03 | 1.36 | -1.39 |
Drawdowns
TLTW vs. APRP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TLTW drawdown since its inception was -18.61%, which is greater than APRP's maximum drawdown of -13.66%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TLTW and APRP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TLTW | APRP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.61% | -13.66% | -4.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.97% | -1.09% | -4.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -17.19% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.20% | -0.19% | -3.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.25% | -1.23% | -7.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.99% | 0.24% | +1.75% |
Volatility
TLTW vs. APRP - Volatility Comparison
iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond BuyWrite Strategy ETF (TLTW) has a higher volatility of 2.48% compared to PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April (APRP) at 1.16%. This indicates that TLTW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APRP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TLTW | APRP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.48% | 1.16% | +1.32% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.79% | 3.37% | +2.42% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.70% | 4.33% | +3.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.39% | 9.49% | +1.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.39% | 9.49% | +1.90% |
TLTW vs. APRP - Expense Ratio Comparison
TLTW has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than APRP's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
TLTW vs. APRP - Dividend Comparison
TLTW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.76%, while APRP has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
APRP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 12 ETF - April | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
TLTW iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond BuyWrite Strategy ETF | 11.76% | 14.82% | 14.47% | 19.59% | 8.71% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TLTW and APRP have a correlation of 0.25, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TLTW has higher volatility (2.48%) compared to APRP (1.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TLTW dropped -18.61% vs APRP's -13.66%.
On 1-year performance, APRP leads with 17.90% vs 10.46% for TLTW. On fees, TLTW is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, APRP has been the lower-risk option at 1.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, APRP has performed better with a 17.90% return vs 10.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
TLTW is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for APRP.
TLTW has the higher dividend yield at 11.76%, compared with 0.00% for APRP.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for TLTW and 0.50% for APRP.
APRP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.15 vs 1.37), 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 TLTW and APRP
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