PULS vs. GBIL
Compare and contrast key facts about PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL).
PULS and GBIL are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PULS is an actively managed fund by Prudential. It was launched on Apr 5, 2018. GBIL is a passively managed fund by Goldman Sachs that tracks the performance of the FTSE US Treasury 0-1 Year Composite Select Index. It was launched on Sep 6, 2016.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: PULS or GBIL.
Key characteristics
| PULS | GBIL | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 2.35% | 1.79% |
| 1Y Return | 6.60% | 5.13% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 3.42% | 2.55% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 2.78% | 1.96% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 11.93 | 4.62 |
| Daily Std Dev | 0.56% | 1.11% |
| Max Drawdown | -5.85% | -0.76% |
| Current Drawdown | 0.00% | -0.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between PULS and GBIL is 0.18, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Performance
PULS vs. GBIL - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, PULS achieves a 2.35% return, which is significantly higher than GBIL's 1.79% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
PULS vs. GBIL - Expense Ratio Comparison
PULS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than GBIL's 0.12% 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%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
PULS vs. GBIL - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL). 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.
Dividends
PULS vs. GBIL - Dividend Comparison
PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.68%, more than GBIL's 5.05% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF | 5.68% | 5.48% | 2.30% | 1.19% | 1.85% | 2.92% | 1.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
GBIL Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF | 5.05% | 4.77% | 1.37% | 0.00% | 0.81% | 2.20% | 1.70% | 0.74% | 0.11% |
Drawdowns
PULS vs. GBIL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, which is greater than GBIL's maximum drawdown of -0.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and GBIL. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
PULS vs. GBIL - Volatility Comparison
PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) has a higher volatility of 0.11% compared to Goldman Sachs Access Treasury 0-1 Year ETF (GBIL) at 0.07%. This indicates that PULS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GBIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.