PULS vs. SCHG
PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM, while SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. PULS is actively managed, while SCHG is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PULS returned 4.12%/yr vs 14.90%/yr for SCHG. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PULS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.
Performance
PULS vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PULS achieves a 1.73% return, which is significantly lower than SCHG's 3.75% return.
PULS
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- 1.73%
- 6M
- 2.05%
- 1Y
- 4.65%
- 3Y*
- 5.58%
- 5Y*
- 4.12%
- 10Y*
- —
SCHG
- 1D
- 0.15%
- 1M
- -0.94%
- YTD
- 3.75%
- 6M
- 2.93%
- 1Y
- 20.82%
- 3Y*
- 24.03%
- 5Y*
- 14.90%
- 10Y*
- 18.53%
PULS vs. SCHG - 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% |
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 3.75% | 17.50% | 34.95% | 50.10% | -31.80% | 28.11% | 39.14% | 36.02% | -3.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between PULS and SCHG is 0.21, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.21 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2018 | 0.08 |
The correlation between PULS and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.07 (all time) to 0.21 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
PULS vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PULS
SCHG
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
PULS
SCHG
Basic Materials
PULS
-
SCHG
Communication Services
PULS
-
SCHG
Consumer Cyclical
PULS
-
SCHG
Consumer Defensive
PULS
-
SCHG
Energy
PULS
-
SCHG
Healthcare
PULS
-
SCHG
Industrials
PULS
-
SCHG
Real Estate
PULS
-
SCHG
Technology
PULS
-
SCHG
Utilities
PULS
-
SCHG
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. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank
PULS
SCHG
PULS vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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 | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +9.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +30.80 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 7.53 | 1.24 | +6.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 52.00 | 1.27 | +50.72 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 314.53 | 4.25 | +310.28 |
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 | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.31 | 1.33 | +9.98 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 5.92 | 0.67 | +5.24 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.86 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.51 | 0.83 | +1.67 |
Drawdowns
PULS vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and SCHG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PULS | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.85% | -34.59% | +28.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.09% | -16.41% | +16.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.34% | -23.39% | +23.05% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.79% | -34.59% | +33.80% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.59% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.02% | -4.25% | +4.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.09% | -5.20% | +5.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.01% | 4.91% | -4.90% |
Volatility
PULS vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) is 0.11%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 4.52%. This indicates that PULS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PULS | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.11% | 4.52% | -4.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.30% | 12.02% | -11.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41% | 15.77% | -15.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.70% | 22.31% | -21.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.33% | 21.58% | -20.25% |
PULS vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison
PULS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% 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%.
Dividends
PULS vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison
PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than SCHG's 0.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 0.37% | 0.36% | 0.39% | 0.46% | 0.55% | 0.42% | 0.52% | 0.82% | 1.27% | 1.01% | 1.04% | 1.22% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PULS and SCHG have a correlation of 0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SCHG has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULS dropped -5.85% vs SCHG's -34.59%.
On 5-year performance, SCHG leads with 14.90% vs 4.12% for PULS. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% 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.
Over the 5-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 14.90% return vs 4.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for PULS.
PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 0.37% for SCHG.
PULS is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PULS and 0.04% for SCHG.
PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.31 vs 1.33), 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 SCHG
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