IBTL vs. PULS

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

IBTL (iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Treasury ETF) and PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IBTL is a Government Bonds fund tracking the ICE 2031 Maturity US Treasury Index, while PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM. IBTL is passively managed, while PULS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IBTL returned 3.19%/yr vs 5.59%/yr for PULS. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IBTL charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for PULS.

Performance

IBTL vs. PULS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Treasury ETF (IBTL) and PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBTL achieves a -0.37% return, which is significantly lower than PULS's 1.88% return.

IBTL

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.59%
• YTD: -0.37%
• 6M: -0.06%
• 1Y: 3.51%
• 3Y*: 3.19%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PULS

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 1.88%
• 6M: 2.10%
• 1Y: 4.67%
• 3Y*: 5.59%
• 5Y*: 4.14%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IBTL vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IBTL iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Treasury ETF	-0.37%	7.85%	0.36%	3.60%	-15.60%	-1.22%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.88%	4.97%	6.12%	6.26%	1.52%	0.03%

Correlation

The correlation between IBTL and PULS is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 30, 2021	0.39

Return for Risk

IBTL vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBTL

IBTL Risk / Return Rank: 28
IBTL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
IBTL Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
IBTL Omega Ratio Rank: 27
IBTL Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
IBTL Martin Ratio Rank: 27

PULS

PULS Risk / Return Rank: 99
PULS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Omega Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

IBTL vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Treasury ETF (IBTL) 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.

	IBTL	PULS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.94	11.41	-10.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.45	32.91	-31.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.16	7.59	-6.43
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.16	52.47	-51.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.19	317.38	-314.19

IBTL vs. PULS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBTL Sharpe Ratio is 0.94, which is lower than the PULS Sharpe Ratio of 11.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBTL 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.

Drawdowns

IBTL vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBTL drawdown since its inception was -20.93%, which is greater than PULS's maximum drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBTL and PULS.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBTL	PULS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.93%	-5.85%	-15.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.83%	-0.09%	-2.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.38%	-0.34%	-7.04%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-0.79%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.16%	0.00%	-7.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.43%	-0.09%	-11.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.03%	0.01%	+1.02%

Volatility

IBTL vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison

iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Treasury ETF (IBTL) has a higher volatility of 1.11% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) at 0.11%. This indicates that IBTL'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.

Volatility by Period

	IBTL	PULS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.11%	0.11%	+1.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.41%	0.30%	+2.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.50%	0.41%	+3.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.44%	0.70%	+6.74%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.44%	1.33%	+6.11%

IBTL vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBTL 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

IBTL vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison

IBTL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.97%, less than PULS's 4.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
IBTL iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Treasury ETF	3.97%	3.93%	4.07%	3.04%	2.36%	0.70%	0.00%	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

Can I hold both IBTL and PULS in my portfolio?

IBTL and PULS have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBTL or PULS?

IBTL has higher volatility (1.11%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBTL dropped -20.93% vs PULS's -5.85%.

Which ETF is better, IBTL or PULS?

On 3-year performance, PULS leads with 5.59% vs 3.19% for IBTL. On fees, IBTL 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.

Which ETF has performed better, IBTL or PULS?

Over the 3-year period, PULS has performed better with a 5.59% return vs 3.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBTL or PULS?

IBTL is cheaper with a 0.07% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for PULS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBTL or PULS?

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.57%, compared with 3.97% for IBTL.

What is the main difference between IBTL and PULS?

IBTL 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 IBTL and 0.15% for PULS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.41 vs 0.94), 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.