PULS vs. SCHV
PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) and SCHV (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM, while SCHV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Value Total Stock Market Index. PULS is actively managed, while SCHV is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PULS returned 4.12%/yr vs 10.33%/yr for SCHV. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PULS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHV.
Performance
PULS vs. SCHV - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PULS achieves a 1.73% return, which is significantly lower than SCHV's 14.24% return.
PULS
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.26%
- YTD
- 1.73%
- 6M
- 2.05%
- 1Y
- 4.65%
- 3Y*
- 5.58%
- 5Y*
- 4.12%
- 10Y*
- —
SCHV
- 1D
- 0.45%
- 1M
- 3.06%
- YTD
- 14.24%
- 6M
- 15.31%
- 1Y
- 26.78%
- 3Y*
- 18.05%
- 5Y*
- 10.33%
- 10Y*
- 11.38%
PULS vs. SCHV - 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% |
SCHV Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF | 14.24% | 16.02% | 14.13% | 8.93% | -7.65% | 25.58% | 2.64% | 25.92% | -5.44% |
Correlation
The correlation between PULS and SCHV is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.24 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.12 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2018 | 0.09 |
The correlation between PULS and SCHV shifts across timeframes, from 0.09 (all time) to 0.24 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
PULS vs. SCHV - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PULS
SCHV
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
PULS
SCHV
Basic Materials
PULS
-
SCHV
Communication Services
PULS
-
SCHV
Consumer Cyclical
PULS
-
SCHV
Consumer Defensive
PULS
-
SCHV
Energy
PULS
-
SCHV
Healthcare
PULS
-
SCHV
Industrials
PULS
-
SCHV
Real Estate
PULS
-
SCHV
Technology
PULS
-
SCHV
Utilities
PULS
-
SCHV
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. SCHV — Risk / Return Rank
PULS
SCHV
PULS vs. SCHV - 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 Value ETF (SCHV). 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 | SCHV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +8.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +29.12 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 7.53 | 1.44 | +6.09 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 52.00 | 3.94 | +48.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 314.53 | 15.87 | +298.65 |
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 | SCHV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.31 | 2.50 | +8.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 5.92 | 0.71 | +5.20 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.67 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.51 | 0.71 | +1.79 |
Drawdowns
PULS vs. SCHV - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, smaller than the maximum SCHV drawdown of -37.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and SCHV.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PULS | SCHV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.85% | -37.08% | +31.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.09% | -6.83% | +6.74% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.34% | -15.26% | +14.92% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.79% | -19.78% | +18.99% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -37.08% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.02% | -1.49% | +1.47% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.09% | -3.83% | +3.74% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.01% | 1.69% | -1.68% |
Volatility
PULS vs. SCHV - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) is 0.11%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF (SCHV) has a volatility of 3.33%. This indicates that PULS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PULS | SCHV | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.11% | 3.33% | -3.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.30% | 8.37% | -8.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41% | 10.80% | -10.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.70% | 14.53% | -13.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.33% | 16.95% | -15.62% |
PULS vs. SCHV - Expense Ratio Comparison
PULS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHV'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. SCHV - Dividend Comparison
PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than SCHV's 1.78% 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% |
SCHV Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF | 1.78% | 2.02% | 2.25% | 2.42% | 2.37% | 1.93% | 3.03% | 3.02% | 3.05% | 2.37% | 2.65% | 2.69% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PULS and SCHV have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SCHV has higher volatility (3.33%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULS dropped -5.85% vs SCHV's -37.08%.
On 5-year performance, SCHV leads with 10.33% vs 4.12% for PULS. On fees, SCHV 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, SCHV has performed better with a 10.33% return vs 4.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHV 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 1.78% for SCHV.
PULS is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while SCHV is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PULS and 0.04% for SCHV.
PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.31 vs 2.50), 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 SCHV
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