IEFA vs. PULS

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

IEFA (iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF) and PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IEFA is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI EAFE IMI Index (Net), while PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM. IEFA is passively managed, while PULS is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, IEFA returned 7.82%/yr vs 4.12%/yr for PULS. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. IEFA charges 0.07%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for PULS.

Performance

IEFA vs. PULS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) 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, IEFA achieves a 7.49% return, which is significantly higher than PULS's 1.73% return.

IEFA

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: -1.17%
• YTD: 7.49%
• 6M: 10.04%
• 1Y: 19.61%
• 3Y*: 16.13%
• 5Y*: 7.82%
• 10Y*: 9.37%

PULS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.26%
• YTD: 1.73%
• 6M: 2.05%
• 1Y: 4.65%
• 3Y*: 5.58%
• 5Y*: 4.12%
• 10Y*: —

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

IEFA vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF	7.49%	32.08%	3.26%	17.95%	-15.24%	11.63%	8.18%	22.64%	-15.04%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.73%	4.97%	6.12%	6.26%	1.52%	0.48%	1.47%	2.97%	1.71%

Correlation

The correlation between IEFA and PULS is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.29
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.19
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2018	0.13

The correlation between IEFA and PULS shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (all time) to 0.29 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IEFA vs. PULS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IEFA	PULS
Financial Services	22.5%	1.5%
Industrials	20.1%	-
Technology	10.8%	-
Healthcare	9.5%	-
Consumer Cyclical	8.0%	-
Basic Materials	7.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	6.6%	-
Communication Services	4.4%	-
Energy	3.8%	-
Utilities	3.6%	-
Real Estate	3.0%	-

Return for Risk

IEFA vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank

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

IEFA

IEFA Risk / Return Rank: 40
IEFA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
IEFA Sortino Ratio Rank: 40
IEFA Omega Ratio Rank: 40
IEFA Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
IEFA Martin Ratio Rank: 43

PULS

PULS Risk / Return Rank: 100
PULS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Omega Ratio Rank: 100
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.

IEFA vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) 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.

	IEFA	PULS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.30	11.31	-10.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	32.62	-30.75
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	7.53	-6.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.71	52.00	-50.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.52	314.53	-308.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IEFA vs. PULS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IEFA Sharpe Ratio is 1.30, which is lower than the PULS Sharpe Ratio of 11.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IEFA 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IEFA	PULS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.30	11.31	-10.01
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.47	5.92	-5.44
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.54	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	2.51	-2.00

Drawdowns

IEFA vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IEFA drawdown since its inception was -34.78%, which is greater than PULS's maximum drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IEFA and PULS.

Drawdown Indicators

	IEFA	PULS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.78%	-5.85%	-28.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.50%	-0.09%	-11.41%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.76%	-0.34%	-13.42%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.41%	-0.79%	-29.62%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.78%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.44%	-0.02%	-2.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.69%	-0.09%	-6.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.02%	0.01%	+3.01%

Volatility

IEFA vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison

iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF (IEFA) has a higher volatility of 4.54% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) at 0.11%. This indicates that IEFA'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

	IEFA	PULS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.54%	0.11%	+4.43%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.74%	0.30%	+12.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.22%	0.41%	+14.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.55%	0.70%	+15.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.32%	1.33%	+15.99%

IEFA vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison

IEFA 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

IEFA vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison

IEFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.30%, less than PULS's 4.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IEFA iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF	3.30%	3.55%	3.47%	3.20%	2.70%	3.32%	1.90%	3.18%	3.46%	2.57%	2.96%	2.63%
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

Can I hold both IEFA and PULS in my portfolio?

IEFA and PULS have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IEFA or PULS?

IEFA has higher volatility (4.54%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IEFA dropped -34.78% vs PULS's -5.85%.

Which ETF is better, IEFA or PULS?

On 5-year performance, IEFA leads with 7.82% vs 4.12% for PULS. On fees, IEFA 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, IEFA or PULS?

Over the 5-year period, IEFA has performed better with a 7.82% return vs 4.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IEFA or PULS?

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

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

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 3.30% for IEFA.

What is the main difference between IEFA and PULS?

IEFA is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while PULS is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: iShares and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.07% for IEFA and 0.15% for PULS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.31 vs 1.30), 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.