PCL vs. FLTR

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

PCL (PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF) and FLTR (VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds. PCL is actively managed, while FLTR is passively managed. Over the past year, PCL returned 0.99% vs 5.01% for FLTR. Their 0.11 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PCL charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for FLTR.

Performance

PCL vs. FLTR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF (PCL) and VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PCL achieves a -1.48% return, which is significantly lower than FLTR's 2.70% return.

PCL

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: -3.27%
• 6M: -1.88%
• YTD: -1.48%
• 1Y: 0.99%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 0.98%

FLTR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.28%
• 6M: 2.20%
• YTD: 2.70%
• 1Y: 5.01%
• 3Y*: 5.93%
• 5Y*: 4.62%
• 10Y*: 3.51%
• ALL TIME*: 2.56%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF	$37.02M	$34.21M	$28.94M
PCL PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF	$983.78K	$474.50K	$658.91K

PCL vs. FLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PCL PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF	-1.48%	2.51%
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF	2.70%	2.28%

Correlation

The correlation between PCL and FLTR is 0.12, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2025	0.11

Return for Risk

PCL vs. FLTR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

PCL

PCL Risk / Return Rank: 12
PCL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
PCL Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
PCL Omega Ratio Rank: 11
PCL Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
PCL Martin Ratio Rank: 13

FLTR

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

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PCL vs. FLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF (PCL) and VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF (FLTR). 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.

	PCL	FLTR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.13	6.37	-6.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.23	11.84	-11.61
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.03	2.95	-1.92
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.19	16.05	-15.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.45	94.74	-94.30

PCL vs. FLTR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PCL Sharpe Ratio is 0.13, which is lower than the FLTR Sharpe Ratio of 6.37. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PCL and FLTR, 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

PCL vs. FLTR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PCL drawdown since its inception was -5.14%, smaller than the maximum FLTR drawdown of -17.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCL and FLTR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PCL	FLTR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.14%	-17.84%	+12.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.14%	-0.31%	-4.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.93%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-3.06%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-17.84%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.37%	0.00%	-4.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.84%	-0.66%	-1.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.22%	0.05%	+2.17%

Volatility

PCL vs. FLTR - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF (PCL) has a higher volatility of 2.18% compared to VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) at 0.17%. This indicates that PCL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PCL	FLTR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.18%	0.17%	+2.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.16%	0.64%	+5.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.84%	0.79%	+7.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.83%	2.13%	+5.70%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	7.83%	5.00%	+2.83%

PCL vs. FLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PCL has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than FLTR's 0.14% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

PCL vs. FLTR - Dividend Comparison

PCL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.47%, more than FLTR's 4.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF	4.58%	4.97%	5.93%	6.07%	2.29%	0.63%	1.49%	3.05%	2.67%	1.69%	1.16%	0.71%
PCL PGIM Corporate Bond 10+ Year ETF	6.47%	2.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PCL and FLTR in my portfolio?

PCL and FLTR have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PCL or FLTR?

PCL has higher volatility (2.18%) compared to FLTR (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PCL dropped -5.14% vs FLTR's -17.84%.

Which ETF is better, PCL or FLTR?

On 1-year performance, FLTR leads with 5.01% vs 0.99% for PCL. On fees, FLTR is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, FLTR has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PCL or FLTR?

Over the 1-year period, FLTR has performed better with a 5.01% return vs 0.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PCL or FLTR?

FLTR is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for PCL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PCL or FLTR?

PCL has the higher dividend yield at 6.47%, compared with 4.58% for FLTR.

What is the main difference between PCL and FLTR?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for PCL and 0.14% for FLTR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.37 vs 0.13), 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.