PULS vs. TBX
PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) and TBX (ProShares Short 7-10 Year Treasury) are both exchange-traded funds - PULS is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PGIM, while TBX is a Inverse Bonds fund tracking the ICE BofA US Treasury (7-10 Y) (-100%). PULS is actively managed, while TBX is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PULS returned 4.12%/yr vs 5.98%/yr for TBX. At a correlation of -0.24, they often move in opposite directions. PULS charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TBX.
Performance
PULS vs. TBX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PULS achieves a 1.73% return, which is significantly lower than TBX's 3.03% return.
PULS
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.36%
- YTD
- 1.73%
- 6M
- 2.09%
- 1Y
- 4.70%
- 3Y*
- 5.61%
- 5Y*
- 4.12%
- 10Y*
- —
TBX
- 1D
- 0.26%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- YTD
- 3.03%
- 6M
- 4.03%
- 1Y
- 2.10%
- 3Y*
- 4.79%
- 5Y*
- 5.98%
- 10Y*
- 1.97%
PULS vs. TBX - 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% |
TBX ProShares Short 7-10 Year Treasury | 3.03% | -1.15% | 8.52% | 3.99% | 18.31% | 1.70% | -9.96% | -5.20% | -1.29% |
Correlation
The correlation between PULS and TBX is -0.35, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.35 |
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 | -0.24 |
The correlation between PULS and TBX shifts across timeframes, from -0.39 (3 years) to -0.24 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
PULS vs. TBX - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
PULS
TBX
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
PULS
TBX
Basic Materials
PULS
-
TBX
-
Communication Services
PULS
-
TBX
-
Consumer Cyclical
PULS
-
TBX
-
Consumer Defensive
PULS
-
TBX
-
Energy
PULS
-
TBX
-
Healthcare
PULS
-
TBX
-
Industrials
PULS
-
TBX
-
Real Estate
PULS
-
TBX
-
Technology
PULS
-
TBX
-
Utilities
PULS
-
TBX
-
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. TBX — Risk / Return Rank
PULS
TBX
PULS vs. TBX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) and ProShares Short 7-10 Year Treasury (TBX). 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 | TBX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +10.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +32.29 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 7.59 | 1.07 | +6.52 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 52.47 | 0.62 | +51.85 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 318.56 | 1.17 | +317.39 |
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 | TBX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.41 | 0.42 | +10.98 |
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 | — | 0.28 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.51 | -0.16 | +2.67 |
Drawdowns
PULS vs. TBX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PULS drawdown since its inception was -5.85%, smaller than the maximum TBX drawdown of -41.04%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULS and TBX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PULS | TBX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -5.85% | -41.04% | +35.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.09% | -3.39% | +3.30% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -0.34% | -7.77% | +7.43% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -0.79% | -7.77% | +6.98% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -19.46% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -17.13% | +17.13% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.09% | -26.64% | +26.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.01% | 1.80% | -1.79% |
Volatility
PULS vs. TBX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) is 0.11%, while ProShares Short 7-10 Year Treasury (TBX) has a volatility of 1.68%. This indicates that PULS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TBX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PULS | TBX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.11% | 1.68% | -1.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.30% | 3.39% | -3.09% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.41% | 4.97% | -4.56% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.70% | 8.44% | -7.74% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 1.33% | 7.14% | -5.81% |
PULS vs. TBX - Expense Ratio Comparison
PULS has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than TBX's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
PULS vs. TBX - Dividend Comparison
PULS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.58%, more than TBX's 3.04% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF | 4.58% | 4.78% | 5.62% | 5.48% | 2.30% | 1.19% | 1.85% | 2.69% | 1.87% |
TBX ProShares Short 7-10 Year Treasury | 3.04% | 3.45% | 6.58% | 4.07% | 0.40% | 0.00% | 0.10% | 1.53% | 0.72% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PULS and TBX have a correlation of -0.35, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
TBX has higher volatility (1.68%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULS dropped -5.85% vs TBX's -41.04%.
On 5-year performance, TBX leads with 5.98% vs 4.12% 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.
Over the 5-year period, TBX has performed better with a 5.98% return vs 4.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PULS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TBX.
PULS has the higher dividend yield at 4.58%, compared with 3.04% for TBX.
PULS is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while TBX is Inverse Bonds. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for PULS and 0.95% for TBX.
PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.41 vs 0.42), 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 TBX
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