PULS vs. LQD
PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) and LQD (iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM, while LQD is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the iBoxx $ Liquid Investment Grade Index. PULS is actively managed, while LQD is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PULS returned 4.12%/yr vs -0.28%/yr for LQD. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.15% expense ratio.
Performance
PULS vs. LQD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PULS achieves a 1.73% return, which is significantly higher than LQD's -0.06% return.
PULS
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- 1.73%
- 6M
- 2.05%
- 1Y
- 4.65%
- 3Y*
- 5.58%
- 5Y*
- 4.12%
- 10Y*
- —
LQD
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -0.67%
- YTD
- -0.06%
- 6M
- -0.06%
- 1Y
- 5.73%
- 3Y*
- 4.95%
- 5Y*
- -0.28%
- 10Y*
- 2.41%
PULS vs. LQD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF | 1.73% | 4.97% | 6.12% | 6.26% | 1.52% | 0.48% | 1.47% | 2.97% | 1.71% |
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | -0.06% | 7.90% | 0.86% | 9.40% | -17.92% | -1.84% | 10.97% | 17.37% | -1.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between PULS and LQD is 0.29, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.39 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2018 | 0.27 |
The correlation between PULS and LQD shifts across timeframes, from 0.27 (all time) to 0.39 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
PULS vs. LQD — Risk / Return Rank
PULS
LQD
PULS vs. LQD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD). 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 | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +10.23 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +31.04 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 7.53 | 1.19 | +6.35 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 52.00 | 1.72 | +50.27 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 314.53 | 4.88 | +309.64 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| PULS | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.31 | 1.08 | +10.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 5.92 | -0.03 | +5.95 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.28 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.51 | 0.54 | +1.97 |
Drawdowns
PULS vs. LQD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, smaller than the maximum LQD drawdown of -24.95%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and LQD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PULS | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.85% | -24.95% | +19.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.09% | -3.34% | +3.25% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.34% | -8.43% | +8.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.79% | -24.95% | +24.16% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -24.95% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.02% | -4.21% | +4.19% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.09% | -3.99% | +3.90% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.01% | 1.18% | -1.17% |
Volatility
PULS vs. LQD - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) is 0.11%, while iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF (LQD) has a volatility of 1.62%. This indicates that PULS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LQD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PULS | LQD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.11% | 1.62% | -1.51% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.30% | 3.94% | -3.64% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41% | 5.32% | -4.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.70% | 8.65% | -7.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.33% | 8.68% | -7.35% |
PULS vs. LQD - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both PULS and LQD 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. LQD - Dividend Comparison
PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, which matches LQD's 4.59% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
LQD iShares iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF | 4.59% | 4.48% | 4.45% | 3.99% | 3.30% | 2.30% | 2.66% | 3.29% | 3.67% | 3.10% | 3.34% | 3.47% |
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF | 4.58% | 4.78% | 5.62% | 5.48% | 2.30% | 1.19% | 1.85% | 2.69% | 1.87% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PULS and LQD have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
LQD has higher volatility (1.62%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULS dropped -5.85% vs LQD's -24.95%.
On 5-year performance, PULS leads with 4.12% vs -0.28% for LQD. Both ETFs have the same 0.15% expense ratio. On volatility, PULS has been the lower-risk option at 0.11%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, PULS has performed better with a 4.12% return vs -0.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PULS and LQD have the same expense ratio: 0.15% per year.
LQD has the higher dividend yield at 4.59%, compared with 4.58% for PULS.
PULS is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while LQD is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and iShares.
PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.31 vs 1.08), 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.
Find the right allocation for PULS and LQD
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