PULS vs. GSST

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) and GSST (Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Bond ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PULS returned 4.14%/yr vs 3.77%/yr for GSST. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PULS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.16%/yr for GSST.

Performance

PULS vs. GSST - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PULS achieves a 1.88% return, which is significantly higher than GSST's 1.66% return.

PULS

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.38%
• YTD: 1.88%
• 6M: 2.10%
• 1Y: 4.67%
• 3Y*: 5.59%
• 5Y*: 4.14%
• 10Y*: —

GSST

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 1.66%
• 6M: 1.89%
• 1Y: 4.57%
• 3Y*: 5.52%
• 5Y*: 3.77%
• 10Y*: —

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

PULS vs. GSST - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.88%	4.97%	6.12%	6.26%	1.52%	0.48%	1.47%	1.90%
GSST Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.66%	5.20%	6.01%	6.08%	0.13%	0.05%	1.74%	2.64%

Correlation

The correlation between PULS and GSST is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.38
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2019	0.31

The correlation between PULS and GSST shifts across timeframes, from 0.31 (all time) to 0.46 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PULS vs. GSST — Risk / Return Rank

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

PULS

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

GSST

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

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. GSST - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Bond ETF (GSST). 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.

	PULS	GSST	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	11.41	7.94	+3.47
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	32.91	16.51	+16.40
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	7.59	3.93	+3.66
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	52.47	29.85	+22.61
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	317.38	184.69	+132.69

PULS vs. GSST - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PULS Sharpe Ratio is 11.41, which is higher than the GSST Sharpe Ratio of 7.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PULS and GSST, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

PULS vs. GSST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, which is greater than GSST's maximum drawdown of -3.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and GSST.

Drawdown Indicators

	PULS	GSST	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.85%	-3.51%	-2.34%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.09%	-0.15%	+0.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.34%	-0.25%	-0.09%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-0.79%	-1.19%	+0.40%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.09%	-0.16%	+0.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.01%	0.02%	-0.01%

Volatility

PULS vs. GSST - Volatility Comparison

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

Volatility by Period

	PULS	GSST	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%	0.41%	-0.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41%	0.58%	-0.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.70%	0.63%	+0.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.33%	0.86%	+0.47%

PULS vs. GSST - Expense Ratio Comparison

PULS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than GSST's 0.16% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

PULS vs. GSST - Dividend Comparison

PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.57%, more than GSST's 4.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
GSST Goldman Sachs Ultra Short Bond ETF	4.31%	4.56%	5.45%	4.98%	1.97%	0.71%	1.12%	1.66%	0.00%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	4.57%	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 GSST in my portfolio?

PULS and GSST have a correlation of 0.38, 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 GSST?

GSST has higher volatility (0.13%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULS dropped -5.85% vs GSST's -3.51%.

Which ETF is better, PULS or GSST?

On 5-year performance, PULS leads with 4.14% vs 3.77% for GSST. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, PULS or GSST?

Over the 5-year period, PULS has performed better with a 4.14% return vs 3.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PULS or GSST?

PULS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.16% for GSST.

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

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.57%, compared with 4.31% for GSST.

What is the main difference between PULS and GSST?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Goldman Sachs. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PULS and 0.16% for GSST.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.41 vs 7.94), 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.