IBTJ vs. PULS
IBTJ (iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF) and PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBTJ is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2029 Maturity US Treasury Index, while PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM. IBTJ is passively managed, while PULS is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, IBTJ returned -0.15%/yr vs 4.14%/yr for PULS. At a 0.33 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBTJ charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for PULS.
Performance
IBTJ vs. PULS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IBTJ achieves a 0.04% return, which is significantly lower than PULS's 1.88% return.
IBTJ
- 1D
- -0.09%
- 1M
- 0.36%
- YTD
- 0.04%
- 6M
- 0.37%
- 1Y
- 3.40%
- 3Y*
- 3.81%
- 5Y*
- -0.15%
- 10Y*
- —
PULS
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 1.88%
- 6M
- 2.10%
- 1Y
- 4.67%
- 3Y*
- 5.59%
- 5Y*
- 4.14%
- 10Y*
- —
IBTJ vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTJ iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF | 0.04% | 6.89% | 1.82% | 4.49% | -12.45% | -3.57% | 4.03% |
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF | 1.88% | 4.97% | 6.12% | 6.26% | 1.52% | 0.48% | 1.15% |
Correlation
The correlation between IBTJ and PULS is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2020 | 0.33 |
The correlation between IBTJ and PULS shifts across timeframes, from 0.33 (all time) to 0.47 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
IBTJ vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank
IBTJ
PULS
IBTJ vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF (IBTJ) 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.
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.
| IBTJ | PULS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -10.02 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -30.74 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 7.59 | -6.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.02 | 52.47 | -50.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.49 | 317.38 | -311.89 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
IBTJ vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IBTJ drawdown since its inception was -20.19%, which is greater than PULS's maximum drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBTJ and PULS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IBTJ | PULS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.19% | -5.85% | -14.34% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.62% | -0.09% | -1.53% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.43% | -0.34% | -4.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.21% | -0.79% | -16.42% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.17% | 0.00% | -6.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.71% | -0.09% | -9.62% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.59% | 0.01% | +0.58% |
Volatility
IBTJ vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison
iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF (IBTJ) has a higher volatility of 0.69% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) at 0.11%. This indicates that IBTJ'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
| IBTJ | PULS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.69% | 0.11% | +0.58% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.58% | 0.30% | +1.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.36% | 0.41% | +1.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.73% | 0.70% | +5.03% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.98% | 1.33% | +4.65% |
IBTJ vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison
IBTJ has a 0.07% expense ratio, which is lower than PULS's 0.15% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
IBTJ vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison
IBTJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.80%, less than PULS's 4.57% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBTJ iShares iBonds Dec 2029 Term Treasury ETF | 3.80% | 3.78% | 3.95% | 3.48% | 1.86% | 0.74% | 0.61% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF | 4.57% | 4.78% | 5.62% | 5.48% | 2.30% | 1.19% | 1.85% | 2.69% | 1.87% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IBTJ and PULS have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBTJ has higher volatility (0.69%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBTJ dropped -20.19% vs PULS's -5.85%.
On 5-year performance, PULS leads with 4.14% vs -0.15% for IBTJ. On fees, IBTJ is cheaper at 0.07% 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 4.14% return vs -0.15%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBTJ is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for PULS.
PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.57%, compared with 3.80% for IBTJ.
IBTJ is categorized as Government Bonds, while PULS is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: iShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IBTJ and 0.15% for PULS.
PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.41 vs 1.39), 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.
Find the right allocation for IBTJ 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