PBAP vs. PULS

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PBAP (PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April) and PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PBAP is a Options Trading fund actively managed by PGIM, while PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PBAP returned 13.68% vs 4.70% for PULS. At a 0.11 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PBAP charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for PULS.

Performance

PBAP vs. PULS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) 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, PBAP achieves a 6.83% return, which is significantly higher than PULS's 1.73% return.

PBAP

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 1.19%
• YTD: 6.83%
• 6M: 7.73%
• 1Y: 13.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PULS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 1.73%
• 6M: 2.09%
• 1Y: 4.70%
• 3Y*: 5.61%
• 5Y*: 4.12%
• 10Y*: —

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

PBAP vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April	6.83%	6.34%	8.88%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.73%	4.97%	4.43%

Correlation

The correlation between PBAP and PULS is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2024	0.11

Return for Risk

PBAP vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank

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

PBAP

PBAP Risk / Return Rank: 98
PBAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
PBAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
PBAP Omega Ratio Rank: 98
PBAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
PBAP Martin Ratio Rank: 99

PULS

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

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.

PBAP vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) 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.

	PBAP	PULS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	4.41	11.41	-7.00
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	7.56	32.91	-25.35
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.20	7.59	-5.39
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.84	52.47	-40.63
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	85.46	318.56	-233.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PBAP vs. PULS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PBAP Sharpe Ratio is 4.41, which is lower than the PULS Sharpe Ratio of 11.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PBAP 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

	PBAP	PULS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.41	11.41	-7.00
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	5.92	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.46	2.51	-1.05

Drawdowns

PBAP vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PBAP drawdown since its inception was -9.70%, which is greater than PULS's maximum drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PBAP and PULS.

Drawdown Indicators

	PBAP	PULS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.70%	-5.85%	-3.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.17%	-0.09%	-1.08%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.34%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-0.79%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.79%	-0.09%	-0.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.16%	0.01%	+0.15%

Volatility

PBAP vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison

PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April (PBAP) has a higher volatility of 0.59% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) at 0.11%. This indicates that PBAP'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

	PBAP	PULS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.59%	0.11%	+0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.99%	0.30%	+1.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.11%	0.41%	+2.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.11%	0.70%	+6.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.11%	1.33%	+5.78%

PBAP vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison

PBAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than PULS's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

PBAP vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison

PBAP has not paid dividends to shareholders, while PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
PBAP PGIM US Large-Cap Buffer 20 ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	4.58%	4.78%	5.62%	5.48%	2.30%	1.19%	1.85%	2.69%	1.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PBAP and PULS in my portfolio?

PBAP and PULS have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PBAP or PULS?

PBAP has higher volatility (0.59%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PBAP dropped -9.70% vs PULS's -5.85%.

Which ETF is better, PBAP or PULS?

On 1-year performance, PBAP leads with 13.68% vs 4.70% for PULS. On fees, PULS is cheaper at 0.15% 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, PBAP or PULS?

Over the 1-year period, PBAP has performed better with a 13.68% return vs 4.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PBAP or PULS?

PULS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PBAP.

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

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 0.00% for PBAP.

What is the main difference between PBAP and PULS?

PBAP is categorized as Options Trading, while PULS is Ultrashort Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PBAP and 0.15% for PULS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.41 vs 4.41), 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.