PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PMJN vs. PULS
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PMJN vs. PULS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June (PMJN) and PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMJN achieves a 2.33% return, which is significantly higher than PULS's 1.73% return.


PMJN

1D
-0.11%
1M
0.28%
YTD
2.33%
6M
2.88%
1Y
6.52%
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)

PMJN vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
PMJN
PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June
2.33%4.21%
PULS
PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF
1.73%2.93%

Correlation

The correlation between PMJN and PULS is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.26

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 3, 2025

0.26

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

PMJN vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank

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

PMJN
PMJN Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
PMJN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMJN Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMJN Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
PMJN Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMJN Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

PULS
PULS Risk / Return Rank: 100100
Overall Rank
PULS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PULS Sortino Ratio Rank: 100100
Sortino Ratio Rank
PULS Omega Ratio Rank: 100100
Omega Ratio Rank
PULS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
PULS Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PMJN vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June (PMJN) 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.


PMJNPULSDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-7.66

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-26.71

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.97

7.59

-5.62

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.69

52.47

-46.77

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

37.72

318.56

-280.84

PMJN vs. PULS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMJN Sharpe Ratio is 3.75, which is lower than the PULS Sharpe Ratio of 11.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMJN 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PMJNPULSDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.75

11.41

-7.66

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

5.92

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

3.81

2.51

+1.31

Drawdowns

PMJN vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMJN drawdown since its inception was -1.15%, smaller than the maximum PULS drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMJN and PULS.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PMJNPULSDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.15%

-5.85%

+4.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.15%

-0.09%

-1.06%

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

-0.11%

0.00%

-0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.08%

-0.09%

+0.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.17%

0.01%

+0.16%

Volatility

PMJN vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison

PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June (PMJN) has a higher volatility of 0.19% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) at 0.11%. This indicates that PMJN'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PMJNPULSDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.19%

0.11%

+0.08%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.42%

0.30%

+1.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.75%

0.41%

+1.34%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

1.75%

0.70%

+1.05%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

1.75%

1.33%

+0.42%

PMJN vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

PMJN vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison

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


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
PMJN
PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - June
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


PMJN and PULS have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

PMJN has higher volatility (0.19%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMJN dropped -1.15% vs PULS's -5.85%.

On 1-year performance, PMJN leads with 6.52% vs 4.70% for PULS. 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.

Over the 1-year period, PMJN has performed better with a 6.52% return vs 4.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

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

PMJN is categorized as Defined Outcome, while PULS is Ultrashort Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMJN and 0.15% for PULS.

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.41 vs 3.75), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PMJN and PULS

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