PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FLUD vs. PBDC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FLUD vs. PBDC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FLUD achieves a 1.68% return, which is significantly higher than PBDC's -11.42% return.


FLUD

1D
0.08%
1M
0.31%
YTD
1.68%
6M
1.75%
1Y
4.50%
3Y*
5.25%
5Y*
3.65%
10Y*

PBDC

1D
0.30%
1M
-1.31%
YTD
-11.42%
6M
-9.25%
1Y
-11.33%
3Y*
7.11%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FLUD vs. PBDC - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
FLUD
Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF
1.68%5.36%5.44%5.95%1.04%
PBDC
Putnam BDC Income ETF
-11.42%-1.77%19.43%30.52%10.38%

Correlation

The correlation between FLUD and PBDC is 0.07, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.


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

0.07

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

0.03

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 30, 2022

0.02

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

FLUD vs. PBDC — Risk / Return Rank

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

FLUD
FLUD Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
FLUD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLUD Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLUD Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
FLUD Calmar Ratio Rank: 9797
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLUD Martin Ratio Rank: 9797
Martin Ratio Rank

PBDC
PBDC Risk / Return Rank: 44
Overall Rank
PBDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PBDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
Sortino Ratio Rank
PBDC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
Omega Ratio Rank
PBDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
PBDC Martin Ratio Rank: 44
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.

FLUD vs. PBDC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) and Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


FLUDPBDCDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+3.44

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+5.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.61

0.91

+0.70

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

10.33

-0.56

+10.90

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

41.22

-0.98

+42.20

FLUD vs. PBDC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FLUD Sharpe Ratio is 2.83, which is higher than the PBDC Sharpe Ratio of -0.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FLUD and PBDC, 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...

Drawdowns

FLUD vs. PBDC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FLUD drawdown since its inception was -1.66%, smaller than the maximum PBDC drawdown of -20.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLUD and PBDC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FLUDPBDCDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.66%

-20.47%

+18.81%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.44%

-20.15%

+19.71%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-0.59%

-20.47%

+19.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-1.66%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.00%

-18.74%

+18.74%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.24%

-4.83%

+4.59%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.11%

11.58%

-11.47%

Volatility

FLUD vs. PBDC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF (FLUD) is 0.39%, while Putnam BDC Income ETF (PBDC) has a volatility of 5.50%. This indicates that FLUD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBDC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FLUDPBDCDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.39%

5.50%

-5.11%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.78%

15.43%

-14.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.61%

18.66%

-17.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.34%

17.05%

-15.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

1.26%

17.05%

-15.79%

FLUD vs. PBDC - Expense Ratio Comparison

FLUD has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than PBDC's 13.49% expense ratio.


Dividends

FLUD vs. PBDC - Dividend Comparison

FLUD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.26%, less than PBDC's 11.91% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020
FLUD
Franklin Ultra Short Bond ETF
4.26%4.51%4.97%4.72%1.39%0.92%0.93%
PBDC
Putnam BDC Income ETF
11.91%10.53%9.29%9.86%3.40%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


FLUD and PBDC have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PBDC has higher volatility (5.50%) compared to FLUD (0.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLUD dropped -1.66% vs PBDC's -20.47%.

On 3-year performance, PBDC leads with 7.11% vs 5.25% for FLUD. On fees, FLUD is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLUD has been the lower-risk option at 0.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, PBDC has performed better with a 7.11% return vs 5.25%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLUD is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 13.49% for PBDC.

PBDC has the higher dividend yield at 11.91%, compared with 4.26% for FLUD.

FLUD is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while PBDC is Financials Equities. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for FLUD and 13.49% for PBDC.

FLUD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.83 vs -0.61), 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 FLUD and PBDC

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