JANZ vs PBJN
TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF vs PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June
Which is better, JANZ or PBJN?
JANZ has been ahead.
PBJN has a lower expense ratio. JANZ 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 | JANZ | PBJN |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.80% | 0.50%Best |
| AUM | $42M | $59M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.30% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 32 | 14 |
| YTD Return | +9.88%Best | +5.35% |
| 1Y Return | +10.64%Best | +7.56% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.48% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.90% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.0% | 4.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -14.3% | -8.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $13,332Best | $12,644 |
| Fund Family | TrueShares | PGIM Investments |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Dec 31, 2020 | May 31, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 3, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.4 years).
JANZ vs PBJN 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 2.4 years both funds cover.
JANZ vs PBJN Performance
TrueShares Structured Outcome (January) ETF (JANZ) is an ETF from TrueShares and PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - June (PBJN) is an ETF from PGIM Investments. Over the past year JANZ returned +10.64% while PBJN returned +7.56%. Year to date, JANZ is up 9.88% versus a gain of 5.35% for PBJN.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JANZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 9.0% compared with 4.7% for PBJN. 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 -14.3% for JANZ and -8.7% for PBJN. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.81. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
JANZ charges 0.80% per year while PBJN charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $80 vs $50 annually, a gap of $30 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, JANZ currently yields 1.30% against 0.00% for PBJN.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of JANZ and PBJN 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, JANZ or PBJN?
JANZ has an expense ratio of 0.80% while PBJN charges 0.50%. PBJN is the cheaper option, by $30 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, JANZ or PBJN?
Over the past year JANZ returned +10.64% vs +7.56% for PBJN, so JANZ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), JANZ annualized +12.73% vs +10.27% for PBJN. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, JANZ or PBJN?
JANZ has been the more volatile fund at 9.0% annualized versus 4.7% for PBJN. Worst drawdown: JANZ -14.3% vs PBJN -8.7%.
Should I hold both JANZ and PBJN?
JANZ and PBJN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.81, 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, JANZ or PBJN?
JANZ yields 1.30% while PBJN yields 0.00%, so JANZ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is PBJN better than JANZ?
PBJN has a lower expense ratio. JANZ 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.