PSDM vs. FLDR

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

PSDM (PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF) and FLDR (Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PSDM is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by PGIM, while FLDR is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Fidelity Low Duration Investment Grade Factor Index. PSDM is actively managed, while FLDR is passively managed. Over the past year, PSDM returned 5.07% vs 4.69% for FLDR. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PSDM charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for FLDR.

Performance

PSDM vs. FLDR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF (PSDM) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSDM achieves a 1.08% return, which is significantly lower than FLDR's 1.39% return.

PSDM

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: -0.11%
• YTD: 1.08%
• 6M: 1.59%
• 1Y: 5.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLDR

• 1D: -0.04%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 1.39%
• 6M: 1.74%
• 1Y: 4.69%
• 3Y*: 5.30%
• 5Y*: 3.69%
• 10Y*: —

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

PSDM vs. FLDR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PSDM PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF	1.08%	6.16%	5.48%	3.96%
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF	1.39%	5.41%	5.71%	2.66%

Correlation

The correlation between PSDM and FLDR is 0.63, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2023	0.63

The correlation between PSDM and FLDR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.63 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

PSDM vs. FLDR — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSDM

PSDM Risk / Return Rank: 89
PSDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PSDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
PSDM Omega Ratio Rank: 93
PSDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
PSDM Martin Ratio Rank: 88

FLDR

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

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.

PSDM vs. FLDR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF (PSDM) and Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR). 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.

	PSDM	FLDR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.82	5.81	-2.99
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.76	9.81	-5.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	2.69	-1.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.16	10.01	-5.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.82	68.64	-49.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSDM vs. FLDR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSDM Sharpe Ratio is 2.82, which is lower than the FLDR Sharpe Ratio of 5.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSDM and FLDR, 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

	PSDM	FLDR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.82	5.81	-2.99
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	3.06	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.93	0.61	+2.32

Drawdowns

PSDM vs. FLDR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSDM drawdown since its inception was -1.19%, smaller than the maximum FLDR drawdown of -12.23%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSDM and FLDR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSDM	FLDR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.19%	-12.23%	+11.04%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.19%	-0.47%	-0.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.76%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-2.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-0.06%	-0.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.17%	-0.35%	+0.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.26%	0.07%	+0.19%

Volatility

PSDM vs. FLDR - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF (PSDM) has a higher volatility of 0.54% compared to Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF (FLDR) at 0.20%. This indicates that PSDM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLDR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSDM	FLDR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.54%	0.20%	+0.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.29%	0.58%	+0.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.76%	0.81%	+0.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.01%	1.21%	+0.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.01%	5.26%	-3.25%

PSDM vs. FLDR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSDM has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than FLDR's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSDM vs. FLDR - Dividend Comparison

PSDM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.85%, more than FLDR's 4.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
FLDR Fidelity Low Duration Bond Factor ETF	4.43%	4.66%	5.50%	5.28%	2.09%	0.51%	1.22%	2.69%	1.38%
PSDM PGIM Short Duration Multi-Sector Bond ETF	4.85%	4.57%	5.17%	2.91%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSDM and FLDR in my portfolio?

PSDM and FLDR have a correlation of 0.63, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSDM or FLDR?

PSDM has higher volatility (0.54%) compared to FLDR (0.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSDM dropped -1.19% vs FLDR's -12.23%.

Which ETF is better, PSDM or FLDR?

On 1-year performance, PSDM leads with 5.07% vs 4.69% for FLDR. On fees, FLDR is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, FLDR has been the lower-risk option at 0.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSDM or FLDR?

Over the 1-year period, PSDM has performed better with a 5.07% return vs 4.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSDM or FLDR?

FLDR is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for PSDM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSDM or FLDR?

PSDM has the higher dividend yield at 4.85%, compared with 4.43% for FLDR.

What is the main difference between PSDM and FLDR?

PSDM is categorized as Multisector Bonds, while FLDR is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Fidelity. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for PSDM and 0.15% for FLDR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.81 vs 2.82), 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.