ACIO vs PMAP
Aptus Collared Investment Opportunity ETF vs PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April
Which is better, ACIO or PMAP?
ACIO has been ahead.
PMAP has a lower expense ratio. ACIO led over 1Y and the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACIO | PMAP |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79% | 0.50%Best |
| AUM | $2.4B | $5M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.39% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 524 | 14 |
| YTD Return | +8.01%Best | +4.90% |
| 1Y Return | +8.79%Best | +6.34% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.63% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.74% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 8.9% | 1.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -7.2% | -1.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.5 years | $12,146Best | $11,032 |
| Fund Family | Aptus ETFs | PGIM Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 9, 2019 | Mar 31, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.5 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 1, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.5 years).
ACIO vs PMAP growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.5 years both funds cover.
ACIO vs PMAP Performance
Aptus Collared Investment Opportunity ETF (ACIO) is an ETF from Aptus ETFs and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) is an ETF from PGIM Investments. Over the past year ACIO returned +8.79% while PMAP returned +6.34%. Year to date, ACIO is up 8.01% versus a gain of 4.90% for PMAP.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACIO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 8.9% compared with 1.1% for PMAP. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -7.2% for ACIO and -1.8% for PMAP. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.82. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACIO charges 0.79% per year while PMAP charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $50 annually, a gap of $29 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACIO currently yields 0.39% against 0.00% for PMAP.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of ACIO and PMAP you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACIO or PMAP?
ACIO has an expense ratio of 0.79% while PMAP charges 0.50%. PMAP is the cheaper option, by $29 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ACIO or PMAP?
Over the past year ACIO returned +8.79% vs +6.34% for PMAP, so ACIO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), ACIO annualized +13.84% vs +6.77% for PMAP. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ACIO or PMAP?
ACIO has been the more volatile fund at 8.9% annualized versus 1.1% for PMAP. Worst drawdown: ACIO -7.2% vs PMAP -1.8%.
Should I hold both ACIO and PMAP?
ACIO and PMAP have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACIO or PMAP?
ACIO yields 0.39% while PMAP yields 0.00%, so ACIO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PMAP better than ACIO?
PMAP has a lower expense ratio. ACIO led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.