PHYL vs. BULZ
PHYL (PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF) and BULZ (MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs) are both exchange-traded funds - PHYL is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by PGIM, while BULZ is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the Solactive FANG Innovation Index (300%). PHYL is actively managed, while BULZ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PHYL returned 8.48%/yr vs 52.57%/yr for BULZ. Their 0.52 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. PHYL charges 0.53%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BULZ.
Performance
PHYL vs. BULZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PHYL achieves a 1.43% return, which is significantly lower than BULZ's 14.01% return.
PHYL
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- -0.59%
- 6M
- 0.81%
- YTD
- 1.43%
- 1Y
- 4.95%
- 3Y*
- 8.48%
- 5Y*
- 3.85%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 5.34%
BULZ
- 1D
- 1.93%
- 1M
- -17.83%
- 6M
- 15.82%
- YTD
- 14.01%
- 1Y
- 74.21%
- 3Y*
- 52.57%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 3.31%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $23.90M | $29.65M | $44.16M | |
| $11.83M | $9.14M | $6.26M |
PHYL vs. BULZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PHYL PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF | 1.43% | 9.65% | 8.45% | 11.91% | -11.80% | 1.87% |
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs | 14.01% | 60.09% | 54.09% | 394.22% | -92.26% | 9.17% |
Correlation
The correlation between PHYL and BULZ is 0.54, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.54 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.48 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 18, 2021 | 0.52 |
The correlation between PHYL and BULZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.48 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
PHYL vs. BULZ — Risk / Return Rank
PHYL
BULZ
PHYL vs. BULZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF (PHYL) and MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ). 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.
| PHYL | BULZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.80 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.80 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.17 | +0.11 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.86 | 1.04 | +0.82 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.21 | 2.36 | +5.85 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PHYL vs. BULZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PHYL drawdown since its inception was -22.07%, smaller than the maximum BULZ drawdown of -94.44%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PHYL and BULZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PHYL | BULZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -22.07% | -94.44% | +72.37% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.68% | -55.29% | +52.61% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -4.53% | -67.96% | +63.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -16.11% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.74% | -46.29% | +45.55% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.01% | -57.57% | +54.56% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.61% | 24.42% | -23.81% |
Volatility
PHYL vs. BULZ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF (PHYL) is 0.87%, while MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs (BULZ) has a volatility of 31.48%. This indicates that PHYL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BULZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PHYL | BULZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.87% | 31.48% | -30.61% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.82% | 70.05% | -67.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.38% | 85.72% | -82.34% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.70% | 92.08% | -86.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 7.59% | 92.08% | -84.49% |
PHYL vs. BULZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
PHYL has a 0.53% expense ratio, which is lower than BULZ's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
PHYL vs. BULZ - Dividend Comparison
PHYL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.63%, while BULZ has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BULZ MicroSectors FANG & Innovation 3X Leveraged ETNs | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PHYL PGIM Active High Yield Bond ETF | 7.01% | 7.05% | 8.28% | 7.62% | 6.55% | 6.13% | 7.51% | 7.31% | 1.79% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PHYL and BULZ have a correlation of 0.54, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BULZ has higher volatility (31.48%) compared to PHYL (0.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PHYL dropped -22.07% vs BULZ's -94.44%.
On 3-year performance, BULZ leads with 52.57% vs 8.48% for PHYL. On fees, PHYL is cheaper at 0.53% per year. On volatility, PHYL has been the lower-risk option at 0.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, BULZ has performed better with a 52.57% return vs 8.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PHYL is cheaper with a 0.53% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BULZ.
PHYL has the higher dividend yield at 7.01%, compared with 0.00% for BULZ.
PHYL is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while BULZ is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and BMO. Their fees differ too: 0.53% for PHYL and 0.95% for BULZ.
PHYL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.48 vs 0.67), 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.
Find the right allocation for PHYL and BULZ
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