PULS vs. PBFR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) and PBFR (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM, while PBFR is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PULS returned 4.70% vs 12.83% for PBFR. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PULS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBFR.

Performance

PULS vs. PBFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PULS achieves a 1.73% return, which is significantly lower than PBFR's 4.52% return.

PULS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 1.73%
• 6M: 2.09%
• 1Y: 4.70%
• 3Y*: 5.61%
• 5Y*: 4.12%
• 10Y*: —

PBFR

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: 1.58%
• YTD: 4.52%
• 6M: 5.34%
• 1Y: 12.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PULS vs. PBFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.73%	4.97%	3.20%
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF	4.52%	10.44%	5.53%

Correlation

The correlation between PULS and PBFR is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 14, 2024	0.16

PULS vs. PBFR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PULS	PBFR
Financial Services	1.5%	11.9%
Basic Materials	-	1.8%
Communication Services	-	10.9%
Consumer Cyclical	-	10.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	4.9%
Energy	-	3.5%
Healthcare	-	8.4%
Industrials	-	8.1%
Real Estate	-	1.9%
Technology	-	36.2%
Utilities	-	2.3%

Return for Risk

PULS vs. PBFR — 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: 99
PULS Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Omega Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Martin Ratio Rank: 100

PBFR

PBFR Risk / Return Rank: 90
PBFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PBFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
PBFR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
PBFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
PBFR Martin Ratio Rank: 93

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. PBFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). 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	PBFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	11.41	2.99	+8.42
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	32.91	4.36	+28.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	7.59	1.66	+5.93
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	52.47	4.57	+47.89
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	318.56	24.09	+294.47
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. PBFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PULS Sharpe Ratio is 11.41, which is higher than the PBFR Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PULS and PBFR, 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	PBFR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.41	2.99	+8.42
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	1.54	+0.97

Drawdowns

PULS vs. PBFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, smaller than the maximum PBFR drawdown of -8.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and PBFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PULS	PBFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.85%	-8.50%	+2.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.09%	-2.82%	+2.73%
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%	-0.16%	+0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.09%	-0.63%	+0.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.01%	0.53%	-0.52%

Volatility

PULS vs. PBFR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) is 0.11%, while PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) has a volatility of 0.64%. This indicates that PULS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PBFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PULS	PBFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.11%	0.64%	-0.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.30%	3.34%	-3.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.41%	4.33%	-3.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.70%	6.89%	-6.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.33%	6.89%	-5.56%

PULS vs. PBFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PULS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than PBFR's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

PULS vs. PBFR - Dividend Comparison

PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than PBFR's 0.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%	0.00%	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 PBFR in my portfolio?

PULS and PBFR have a correlation of 0.20, 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 PBFR?

PBFR has higher volatility (0.64%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULS dropped -5.85% vs PBFR's -8.50%.

Which ETF is better, PULS or PBFR?

On 1-year performance, PBFR leads with 12.83% vs 4.70% for PULS. On fees, PULS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, PULS or PBFR?

Over the 1-year period, PBFR has performed better with a 12.83% return vs 4.70%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PULS or PBFR?

PULS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for PBFR.

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

PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 0.01% for PBFR.

What is the main difference between PULS and PBFR?

PULS is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while PBFR is Defined Outcome. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PULS and 0.50% for PBFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.41 vs 2.99), 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.