PULS vs. MINT

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) and MINT (PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past 5 years, PULS returned 4.24%/yr vs 3.60%/yr for MINT. Their 0.32 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. PULS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for MINT.

Performance

PULS vs. MINT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with PULS having a 2.36% return and MINT slightly higher at 2.47%.

PULS

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.29%
• 6M: 1.93%
• YTD: 2.36%
• 1Y: 4.37%
• 3Y*: 5.44%
• 5Y*: 4.24%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.34%

MINT

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.25%
• 6M: 2.09%
• YTD: 2.47%
• 1Y: 4.45%
• 3Y*: 5.24%
• 5Y*: 3.60%
• 10Y*: 2.74%
• ALL TIME*: 2.09%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF	$141.60M	$159.28M	$155.81M
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	$149.74M	$124.03M	$127.61M

PULS vs. MINT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	2.36%	4.97%	6.12%	6.26%	1.52%	0.48%	1.47%	2.97%	1.71%
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF	2.47%	4.74%	5.94%	6.26%	-1.01%	-0.03%	1.62%	3.34%	1.34%

Correlation

The correlation between PULS and MINT is 0.27, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.27
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.27
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 10, 2018	0.32

Return for Risk

PULS vs. MINT — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks 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

MINT

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

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

PULS vs. MINT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT). 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	MINT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	10.51	15.93	-5.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	26.70	51.65	-24.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	6.25	14.85	-8.60
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	50.21	90.98	-40.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	283.67	703.66	-420.00

PULS vs. MINT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PULS Sharpe Ratio is 10.51, which is lower than the MINT Sharpe Ratio of 15.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PULS and MINT, 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. MINT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, which is greater than MINT's maximum drawdown of -4.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and MINT.

Drawdown Indicators

	PULS	MINT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.85%	-4.62%	-1.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.09%	-0.05%	-0.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.34%	-0.16%	-0.18%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-0.79%	-2.42%	+1.63%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-4.62%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.09%	-0.17%	+0.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.02%	0.01%	+0.01%

Volatility

PULS vs. MINT - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT) have volatilities of 0.10% and 0.10%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PULS	MINT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.10%	0.10%	0.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.32%	0.22%	+0.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43%	0.28%	+0.15%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.70%	0.58%	+0.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.32%	0.94%	+0.38%

PULS vs. MINT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PULS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than MINT's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

PULS vs. MINT - Dividend Comparison

PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.87%, more than MINT's 4.22% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF	3.84%	4.63%	5.22%	4.91%	1.90%	0.44%	1.15%	2.65%	2.32%	1.61%	1.35%	0.88%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	4.47%	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

Can I hold both PULS and MINT in my portfolio?

PULS and MINT have a correlation of 0.27, 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 MINT?

MINT has higher volatility (0.10%) compared to PULS (0.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULS dropped -5.85% vs MINT's -4.62%.

Which ETF is better, PULS or MINT?

On 5-year performance, PULS leads with 4.24% vs 3.60% for MINT. 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 MINT?

Over the 5-year period, PULS has performed better with a 4.24% return vs 3.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PULS or MINT?

PULS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.36% for MINT.

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

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.47%, compared with 3.84% for MINT.

What is the main difference between PULS and MINT?

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PULS and 0.36% for MINT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MINT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (15.93 vs 10.51), 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.