PJFM vs. QLTY ETF Comparison

Comparison of PGIM Jennison Focused Mid-Cap ETF (PJFM) to GMO U.S. Quality ETF (QLTY)

PJFM

PGIM Jennison Focused Mid-Cap ETF

PJFM Description

Under normal circumstances, the fund invests at least 80% of the fund's investable assets in equity and equity-related securities of medium-sized companies. The subadviser uses a combination of fundamental research and systematic portfolio construction. The fund's managers consider medium-sized companies to be those with market capitalizations that are within the market capitalization range of the Russell Midcap Index.

Grade (RS Rating)

Last Trade

$61.72

Average Daily Volume

202

Number of Holdings ^*

* may have additional holdings in another (foreign) market

QLTY

GMO U.S. Quality ETF

QLTY Description

QLTY seeks total return by investing in US companies deemed high quality. These companies are defined as having established businesses capable of delivering substantial returns on past investments, utilizing cash flows for high-return investments, or returning cash to shareholders through dividends or share buybacks. The investment strategy combines systematic factors like profitability and leverage, alongside judgmental factors such as assessments of future profitability and growth prospects. It may also use various valuation methodologies, including discounted cash flow analysis and multiples of price-to-earnings, revenues, book values, or other fundamental metrics, to acquire underrated stocks. Additionally, the fund may invest in other ETFs. The fund may also invest in the GMO U.S. Treasury Fund, and money market funds. Investment decisions are not constrained by portfolio turnover rates or benchmark considerations.

Grade (RS Rating)

Last Trade

$32.50

Average Daily Volume

265,587

Number of Holdings ^*

* may have additional holdings in another (foreign) market

Performance

Period	PJFM	QLTY
30 Days	4.05%	0.40%
60 Days	8.25%	0.12%
90 Days	11.66%	2.04%
12 Months		26.17%

1 Overlapping Holdings

	Symbol	Grade	Weight in PJFM	Weight in QLTY	Overlap
	HLT	A	2.97%	2.62%	2.62%

PJFM Overweight 41 Positions Relative to QLTY

Symbol	Grade	Weight
GLPI	C	4.67%
FOUR	A	4.26%
NI	A	4.19%
TRGP	A	4.07%
CHDN	B	3.75%
MKL	A	3.68%
WTFC	A	3.29%
CCK	D	3.29%
EWBC	A	3.03%
LNG	A	2.98%
BURL	B	2.96%
GTES	A	2.78%
RL	C	2.74%
KEX	B	2.65%
PR	B	2.54%
LHX	C	2.45%
AXS	A	2.44%
GNRC	C	2.4%
ALSN	B	2.17%
VRT	B	2.02%
CYBR	A	1.95%
IRT	A	1.89%
LFUS	D	1.87%
NTRA	A	1.87%
CMS	C	1.85%
RNR	C	1.81%
CBRE	B	1.79%
KBR	F	1.58%
PFGC	B	1.57%
NBIX	C	1.53%
ESNT	F	1.5%
LPLA	A	1.42%
MNDY	C	1.34%
RYAN	A	1.12%
PINS	F	1.05%
ENTG	D	1.03%
COHR	B	0.97%
OLED	F	0.89%
EHC	B	0.88%
HEI	A	0.56%
PCVX	D	0.55%

PJFM Underweight 33 Positions Relative to QLTY

Symbol	Grade	Weight
MSFT	D	-6.46%
AAPL	C	-5.33%
ORCL	A	-4.71%
META	D	-4.5%
GOOGL	C	-4.43%
JNJ	C	-4.24%
ABT	B	-4.17%
UNH	B	-3.62%
TXN	C	-3.53%
ACN	B	-3.3%
V	A	-3.22%
PG	C	-3.2%
ISRG	A	-2.92%
KLAC	F	-2.85%
LRCX	F	-2.85%
CRM	B	-2.84%
KO	D	-2.81%
ARMK	B	-2.56%
ELV	F	-2.5%
WFC	A	-2.45%
AVGO	D	-2.45%
MRK	D	-2.41%
AMZN	C	-2.4%
USB	A	-2.31%
OTIS	C	-2.25%
TJX	A	-2.14%
GE	D	-1.73%
MDLZ	F	-1.72%
LLY	F	-1.61%
STZ	D	-1.59%
CI	D	-1.49%
DGX	A	-1.35%
TMO	F	-0.91%