PULS vs. DUSB

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) and DUSB (Dimensional Ultrashort Fixed Income ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PULS returned 4.67% vs 4.27% for DUSB. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.

Performance

PULS vs. DUSB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and Dimensional Ultrashort Fixed Income ETF (DUSB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with PULS having a 1.75% return and DUSB slightly lower at 1.68%.

PULS

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 1.75%
• 6M: 2.12%
• 1Y: 4.67%
• 3Y*: 5.59%
• 5Y*: 4.12%
• 10Y*: —

DUSB

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.33%
• YTD: 1.68%
• 6M: 1.99%
• 1Y: 4.27%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PULS vs. DUSB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.75%	4.97%	6.12%	1.82%
DUSB Dimensional Ultrashort Fixed Income ETF	1.68%	4.53%	5.60%	1.79%

Correlation

The correlation between PULS and DUSB is 0.17, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.14

Return for Risk

PULS vs. DUSB — Risk / Return Rank

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

PULS

PULS Risk / Return Rank: 100
PULS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Omega Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Martin Ratio Rank: 100

DUSB

DUSB Risk / Return Rank: 99
DUSB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
DUSB Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
DUSB Omega Ratio Rank: 99
DUSB Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
DUSB Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

PULS vs. DUSB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and Dimensional Ultrashort Fixed Income ETF (DUSB). 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.

	PULS	DUSB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	11.37	10.01	+1.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	32.77	23.87	+8.89
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	7.56	4.83	+2.73
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	52.23	54.47	-2.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	318.30	329.63	-11.33
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PULS vs. DUSB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PULS Sharpe Ratio is 11.37, which is comparable to the DUSB Sharpe Ratio of 10.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PULS and DUSB, 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

	PULS	DUSB	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.37	10.01	+1.37
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	5.92	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.51	9.87	-7.36

Drawdowns

PULS vs. DUSB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, which is greater than DUSB's maximum drawdown of -0.29%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and DUSB.

Drawdown Indicators

	PULS	DUSB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.85%	-0.29%	-5.56%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.09%	-0.08%	-0.01%
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	0.00%	-0.02%	+0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.09%	-0.01%	-0.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.01%	0.01%	0.00%

Volatility

PULS vs. DUSB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) is 0.11%, while Dimensional Ultrashort Fixed Income ETF (DUSB) has a volatility of 0.13%. This indicates that PULS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DUSB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PULS	DUSB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.11%	0.13%	-0.02%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.30%	0.30%	0.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41%	0.43%	-0.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.70%	0.52%	+0.18%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.33%	0.52%	+0.81%

PULS vs. DUSB - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both PULS and DUSB have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

PULS vs. DUSB - Dividend Comparison

PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than DUSB's 4.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
DUSB Dimensional Ultrashort Fixed Income ETF	4.06%	4.32%	4.92%	1.23%	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

Can I hold both PULS and DUSB in my portfolio?

PULS and DUSB have a correlation of 0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PULS or DUSB?

DUSB has higher volatility (0.13%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULS dropped -5.85% vs DUSB's -0.29%.

Which ETF is better, PULS or DUSB?

On 1-year performance, PULS leads with 4.67% vs 4.27% for DUSB. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PULS or DUSB?

Over the 1-year period, PULS has performed better with a 4.67% return vs 4.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PULS or DUSB?

PULS and DUSB have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PULS or DUSB?

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 4.06% for DUSB.

What is the main difference between PULS and DUSB?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Dimensional.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.37 vs 10.01), 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.