PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLTB vs. PULS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLTB vs. PULS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF (FLTB) and PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLTB achieves a 0.84% return, which is significantly lower than PULS's 1.75% return.


FLTB

1D
0.03%
1M
0.30%
YTD
0.84%
6M
1.18%
1Y
4.37%
3Y*
5.52%
5Y*
2.26%
10Y*
2.47%

PULS

1D
0.02%
1M
0.38%
YTD
1.75%
6M
2.12%
1Y
4.67%
3Y*
5.59%
5Y*
4.12%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLTB vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
FLTB
Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF
0.84%6.60%5.14%5.94%-5.88%-1.20%5.57%5.87%1.95%
PULS
PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF
1.75%4.97%6.12%6.26%1.52%0.48%1.47%2.97%1.71%

Correlation

The correlation between FLTB and PULS is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.31

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.40

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.39

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2018

0.29

The correlation between FLTB and PULS shifts across timeframes, from 0.29 (all time) to 0.40 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FLTB vs. PULS - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FLTB
PULS

Technology

0.0%

-

Financial Services

0.0%
1.5%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Technology

FLTB
0.0%
PULS

-

Financial Services

FLTB
0.0%
PULS
1.5%

Basic Materials

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Communication Services

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Consumer Cyclical

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Consumer Defensive

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Energy

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Healthcare

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Industrials

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Real Estate

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Utilities

FLTB

-

PULS

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

FLTB vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLTB
FLTB Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
FLTB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLTB Sortino Ratio Rank: 7272
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLTB Omega Ratio Rank: 6666
Omega Ratio Rank
FLTB Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLTB Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

PULS
PULS Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
PULS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PULS Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
PULS Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
PULS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
PULS Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FLTB vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF (FLTB) and PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS). 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.


FLTBPULSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-9.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-29.56

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

7.56

-6.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.88

52.23

-49.35

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.23

318.30

-306.08

FLTB vs. PULS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLTB Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is lower than the PULS Sharpe Ratio of 11.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLTB and PULS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FLTBPULSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.08

11.37

-9.29

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

5.92

-5.11

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.85

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.83

2.51

-1.68

Drawdowns

FLTB vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLTB drawdown since its inception was -9.37%, which is greater than PULS's maximum drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLTB and PULS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLTBPULSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-9.37%

-5.85%

-3.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.52%

-0.09%

-1.43%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-1.52%

-0.34%

-1.18%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-9.26%

-0.79%

-8.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-9.37%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

0.00%

-0.26%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.40%

-0.09%

-1.31%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.36%

0.01%

+0.35%

Volatility

FLTB vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF (FLTB) has a higher volatility of 0.62% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) at 0.11%. This indicates that FLTB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PULS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLTBPULSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.62%

0.11%

+0.51%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.63%

0.30%

+1.33%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.13%

0.41%

+1.72%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.80%

0.70%

+2.10%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.94%

1.33%

+1.61%

FLTB vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLTB has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than PULS's 0.15% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FLTB vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison

FLTB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%, less than PULS's 4.58% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FLTB
Fidelity Limited Term Bond ETF
4.36%4.31%4.11%3.20%1.63%0.89%1.56%2.67%2.50%1.78%1.59%1.63%
PULS
PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF
4.58%4.78%5.62%5.48%2.30%1.19%1.85%2.69%1.87%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLTB and PULS have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FLTB has higher volatility (0.62%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLTB dropped -9.37% vs PULS's -5.85%.

On 5-year performance, PULS leads with 4.12% vs 2.26% for FLTB. On fees, PULS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, PULS has been the lower-risk option at 0.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, PULS has performed better with a 4.12% return vs 2.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PULS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FLTB.

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 4.36% for FLTB.

FLTB is categorized as Short-Term Bond, while PULS is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FLTB and 0.15% for PULS.

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.37 vs 2.08), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FLTB and PULS

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer