PBNV vs ZMAR
PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - November vs Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March
Which is better, PBNV or ZMAR?
PBNV has been ahead.
PBNV has a lower expense ratio. PBNV 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 | PBNV | ZMAR |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.50%Best | 0.79% |
| AUM | $37M | $112M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 14 | 21 |
| YTD Return | +8.91%Best | +4.32% |
| 1Y Return | +10.57%Best | +6.04% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.0% | 1.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -6.9% | -2.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.6 years | $11,863Best | $11,053 |
| Fund Family | PGIM Investments | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | May 22, 2024 | Mar 3, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 3, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.6 years).
PBNV vs ZMAR 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 1.6 years both funds cover.
PBNV vs ZMAR Performance
PGIM S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF - November (PBNV) is an ETF from PGIM Investments and Innovator Equity Defined Protection ETF - 1 Yr March (ZMAR) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year PBNV returned +10.57% while ZMAR returned +6.04%. Year to date, PBNV is up 8.91% versus a gain of 4.32% for ZMAR.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PBNV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 5.0% compared with 1.8% for ZMAR. 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 -6.9% for PBNV and -2.3% for ZMAR. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
PBNV charges 0.50% per year while ZMAR charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $50 vs $79 annually, a gap of $29 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, PBNV currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for ZMAR.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of PBNV and ZMAR 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, PBNV or ZMAR?
PBNV has an expense ratio of 0.50% while ZMAR charges 0.79%. PBNV is the cheaper option, by $29 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, PBNV or ZMAR?
Over the past year PBNV returned +10.57% vs +6.04% for ZMAR, so PBNV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), PBNV annualized +11.27% vs +6.46% for ZMAR. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, PBNV or ZMAR?
PBNV has been the more volatile fund at 5.0% annualized versus 1.8% for ZMAR. Worst drawdown: PBNV -6.9% vs ZMAR -2.3%.
Should I hold both PBNV and ZMAR?
PBNV and ZMAR have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, 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, PBNV or ZMAR?
PBNV yields 0.00% while ZMAR yields 0.00%, so ZMAR currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ZMAR better than PBNV?
PBNV has a lower expense ratio. PBNV 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.