XBJL vs. PMAP

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

XBJL (Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July) and PMAP (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, XBJL returned 12.17% vs 7.34% for PMAP. Their correlation of 0.81 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XBJL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMAP.

Performance

XBJL vs. PMAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July (XBJL) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XBJL achieves a 4.17% return, which is significantly higher than PMAP's 3.28% return.

XBJL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 1.01%
• YTD: 4.17%
• 6M: 5.05%
• 1Y: 12.17%
• 3Y*: 11.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PMAP

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.59%
• YTD: 3.28%
• 6M: 3.83%
• 1Y: 7.34%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

XBJL vs. PMAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XBJL Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July	4.17%	12.63%
PMAP PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April	3.28%	5.37%

Correlation

The correlation between XBJL and PMAP is 0.81, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.81
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025	0.81

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

Return for Risk

XBJL vs. PMAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

XBJL

XBJL Risk / Return Rank: 82
XBJL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
XBJL Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
XBJL Omega Ratio Rank: 87
XBJL Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
XBJL Martin Ratio Rank: 90

PMAP

PMAP Risk / Return Rank: 99
PMAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PMAP Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

XBJL vs. PMAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July (XBJL) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). 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.

	XBJL	PMAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.41	6.43	-4.02
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.71	13.39	-9.69
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	2.92	-1.39
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.70	21.40	-17.70
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	20.85	133.92	-113.06
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XBJL vs. PMAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XBJL Sharpe Ratio is 2.41, which is lower than the PMAP Sharpe Ratio of 6.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XBJL and PMAP, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XBJL	PMAP	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.41	6.43	-4.02
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.93	3.23	-2.30

Drawdowns

XBJL vs. PMAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XBJL drawdown since its inception was -11.78%, which is greater than PMAP's maximum drawdown of -1.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBJL and PMAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	XBJL	PMAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.78%	-1.75%	-10.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.30%	-0.34%	-2.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.74%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.06%	+0.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.63%	-0.08%	-1.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.58%	0.05%	+0.53%

Volatility

XBJL vs. PMAP - Volatility Comparison

Innovator U.S. Equity Accelerated 9 Buffer ETF - July (XBJL) has a higher volatility of 0.32% compared to PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) at 0.27%. This indicates that XBJL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XBJL	PMAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.32%	0.27%	+0.05%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.72%	0.81%	+2.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.08%	1.15%	+3.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.99%	2.33%	+7.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.99%	2.33%	+7.66%

XBJL vs. PMAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

XBJL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAP's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

XBJL vs. PMAP - Dividend Comparison

Neither XBJL nor PMAP has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XBJL and PMAP in my portfolio?

XBJL and PMAP have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, XBJL or PMAP?

XBJL has higher volatility (0.32%) compared to PMAP (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XBJL dropped -11.78% vs PMAP's -1.75%.

Which ETF is better, XBJL or PMAP?

On 1-year performance, XBJL leads with 12.17% vs 7.34% for PMAP. On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XBJL or PMAP?

Over the 1-year period, XBJL has performed better with a 12.17% return vs 7.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XBJL or PMAP?

PMAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for XBJL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XBJL or PMAP?

XBJL and PMAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between XBJL and PMAP?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for XBJL and 0.50% for PMAP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.43 vs 2.41), 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.