PCS vs. IGBH
PCS (PGIM Corporate Bond 0-5 Year ETF) and IGBH (iShares Interest Rate Hedged Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF) are both Corporate Bonds funds. PCS is actively managed, while IGBH is passively managed. Over the past year, PCS returned 3.68% vs 6.18% for IGBH. Their 0.32 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PCS charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for IGBH.
Performance
PCS vs. IGBH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PCS achieves a 1.43% return, which is significantly lower than IGBH's 1.53% return.
PCS
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- -0.20%
- 6M
- 1.06%
- YTD
- 1.43%
- 1Y
- 3.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
IGBH
- 1D
- 0.20%
- 1M
- -0.78%
- 6M
- 0.55%
- YTD
- 1.53%
- 1Y
- 6.18%
- 3Y*
- 7.36%
- 5Y*
- 5.15%
- 10Y*
- 4.73%
- ALL TIME*
- 4.59%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $5.00M | $3.48M | $2.46M | |
| $33.09K | $30.68K | $31.15K |
PCS vs. IGBH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PCS PGIM Corporate Bond 0-5 Year ETF | 1.43% | 2.22% |
IGBH iShares Interest Rate Hedged Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF | 1.53% | 4.36% |
Correlation
The correlation between PCS and IGBH is 0.32, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 1, 2025 | 0.32 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
PCS vs. IGBH — Risk / Return Rank
PCS
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IGBH
PCS vs. IGBH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Corporate Bond 0-5 Year ETF (PCS) and iShares Interest Rate Hedged Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF (IGBH). 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.
| PCS | IGBH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.28 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.41 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 5.00 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PCS vs. IGBH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PCS drawdown since its inception was -1.12%, smaller than the maximum IGBH drawdown of -33.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PCS and IGBH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PCS | IGBH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.12% | -33.67% | +32.55% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.12% | -4.24% | +3.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -6.93% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -10.48% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.67% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.20% | -1.13% | +0.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.14% | -2.64% | +2.50% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.19% | — |
Volatility
PCS vs. IGBH - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PCS | IGBH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.81% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 3.07% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.58% | 3.95% | -2.37% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 1.58% | 6.03% | -4.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.58% | 9.19% | -7.61% |
PCS vs. IGBH - Expense Ratio Comparison
PCS has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than IGBH's 0.16% 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
PCS vs. IGBH - Dividend Comparison
PCS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.78%, less than IGBH's 5.61% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IGBH iShares Interest Rate Hedged Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF | 5.61% | 6.23% | 6.88% | 7.32% | 3.84% | 2.71% | 2.39% | 3.40% | 5.56% | 2.87% | 2.62% | 1.12% |
PCS PGIM Corporate Bond 0-5 Year ETF | 4.78% | 1.92% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PCS and IGBH have a correlation of 0.32, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On 1-year performance, IGBH leads with 6.18% vs 3.68% for PCS. On fees, IGBH is cheaper at 0.16% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IGBH has performed better with a 6.18% return vs 3.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IGBH is cheaper with a 0.16% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for PCS.
IGBH has the higher dividend yield at 5.61%, compared with 4.78% for PCS.
They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for PCS and 0.16% for IGBH.
Find the right allocation for PCS and IGBH
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer