MINT vs. PULS

Last updated Jun 12, 2026

MINT (PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF) and PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, MINT returned 3.49%/yr vs 4.14%/yr for PULS. At a 0.32 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MINT charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for PULS.

Performance

MINT vs. PULS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT) and PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with MINT having a 1.90% return and PULS slightly lower at 1.84%.

MINT

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 1.90%
• 6M: 2.18%
• 1Y: 4.68%
• 3Y*: 5.38%
• 5Y*: 3.49%
• 10Y*: 2.72%

PULS

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.34%
• YTD: 1.84%
• 6M: 2.07%
• 1Y: 4.67%
• 3Y*: 5.59%
• 5Y*: 4.14%
• 10Y*: —

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

MINT vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF	1.90%	4.74%	5.94%	6.26%	-1.01%	-0.03%	1.62%	3.34%	1.34%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.84%	4.97%	6.12%	6.26%	1.52%	0.48%	1.47%	2.97%	1.71%

Correlation

The correlation between MINT and PULS is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 10, 2018	0.32

Return for Risk

MINT vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MINT

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

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.

MINT vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT) 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.

	MINT	PULS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	17.37	11.37	+6.00
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	66.36	32.77	+33.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	21.44	7.56	+13.88
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	94.51	52.23	+42.28
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	956.64	315.96	+640.68

MINT vs. PULS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MINT Sharpe Ratio is 17.37, which is higher than the PULS Sharpe Ratio of 11.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MINT 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

MINT vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MINT drawdown since its inception was -4.62%, smaller than the maximum PULS drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MINT and PULS.

Drawdown Indicators

	MINT	PULS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.62%	-5.85%	+1.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.05%	-0.09%	+0.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.16%	-0.34%	+0.18%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-2.42%	-0.79%	-1.63%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-4.62%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.17%	-0.09%	-0.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.00%	0.01%	-0.01%

Volatility

MINT vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT) is 0.09%, while PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) has a volatility of 0.12%. This indicates that MINT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PULS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MINT	PULS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.09%	0.12%	-0.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.20%	0.30%	-0.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27%	0.41%	-0.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.58%	0.70%	-0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.95%	1.33%	-0.38%

MINT vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MINT has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is higher than PULS's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

MINT vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison

MINT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.28%, less than PULS's 4.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF	4.28%	4.63%	5.22%	4.91%	1.90%	0.44%	1.15%	2.65%	2.32%	1.61%	1.35%	0.88%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	4.57%	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 MINT and PULS in my portfolio?

MINT and PULS have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MINT or PULS?

PULS has higher volatility (0.12%) compared to MINT (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MINT dropped -4.62% vs PULS's -5.85%.

Which ETF is better, MINT or PULS?

On 5-year performance, PULS leads with 4.14% vs 3.49% for MINT. On fees, PULS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MINT or PULS?

Over the 5-year period, PULS has performed better with a 4.14% return vs 3.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MINT or PULS?

PULS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for MINT.

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

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.57%, compared with 4.28% for MINT.

What is the main difference between MINT and PULS?

They also come from different issuers: PIMCO and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for MINT and 0.15% for PULS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MINT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.37 vs 11.37), 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.