PULT vs. ENFR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PULT (Putnam ESG Ultra Short ETF) and ENFR (Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PULT is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Putnam, while ENFR is a Energy Equities fund tracking the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index. PULT is actively managed, while ENFR is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PULT returned 5.32%/yr vs 28.90%/yr for ENFR. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. PULT charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for ENFR.

Performance

PULT vs. ENFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Putnam ESG Ultra Short ETF (PULT) and Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PULT achieves a 1.23% return, which is significantly lower than ENFR's 24.93% return.

PULT

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.12%
• YTD: 1.23%
• 6M: 1.38%
• 1Y: 3.98%
• 3Y*: 5.32%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ENFR

• 1D: 1.51%
• 1M: -4.52%
• YTD: 24.93%
• 6M: 25.03%
• 1Y: 27.76%
• 3Y*: 28.90%
• 5Y*: 20.07%
• 10Y*: 11.98%

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

PULT vs. ENFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PULT Putnam ESG Ultra Short ETF	1.23%	5.08%	5.93%	5.47%
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	24.93%	5.88%	42.17%	10.96%

Correlation

The correlation between PULT and ENFR is -0.17, 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	-0.17
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	-0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 20, 2023	-0.04

The correlation between PULT and ENFR shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.04 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

PULT vs. ENFR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

PULT

PULT Risk / Return Rank: 98
PULT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
PULT Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
PULT Omega Ratio Rank: 99
PULT Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
PULT Martin Ratio Rank: 98

ENFR

ENFR Risk / Return Rank: 57
ENFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
ENFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
ENFR Omega Ratio Rank: 54
ENFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
ENFR Martin Ratio Rank: 50

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.

PULT vs. ENFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Putnam ESG Ultra Short ETF (PULT) and Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR). 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.

	PULT	ENFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	5.45	1.88	+3.57
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	9.72	2.59	+7.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.96	1.32	+1.64
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	9.67	3.23	+6.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	70.25	8.24	+62.01

PULT vs. ENFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PULT Sharpe Ratio is 5.45, which is higher than the ENFR Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PULT and ENFR, 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

PULT vs. ENFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PULT drawdown since its inception was -0.43%, smaller than the maximum ENFR drawdown of -68.28%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PULT and ENFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	PULT	ENFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.43%	-68.28%	+67.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.43%	-8.64%	+8.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.43%	-15.58%	+15.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-20.29%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-62.64%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.29%	-4.71%	+4.42%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.02%	-15.94%	+15.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.06%	3.38%	-3.32%

Volatility

PULT vs. ENFR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Putnam ESG Ultra Short ETF (PULT) is 0.55%, while Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF (ENFR) has a volatility of 5.69%. This indicates that PULT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ENFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PULT	ENFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.55%	5.69%	-5.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.64%	11.60%	-10.96%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.77%	14.86%	-14.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.64%	19.25%	-18.61%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.64%	24.68%	-24.04%

PULT vs. ENFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

PULT has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than ENFR's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

PULT vs. ENFR - Dividend Comparison

PULT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.25%, more than ENFR's 4.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ENFR Alerian Energy Infrastructure ETF	4.02%	4.77%	4.41%	5.48%	5.23%	7.86%	7.57%	5.81%	3.98%	2.98%	3.31%	3.34%
PULT Putnam ESG Ultra Short ETF	4.25%	4.59%	5.38%	4.88%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PULT and ENFR in my portfolio?

PULT and ENFR have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PULT or ENFR?

ENFR has higher volatility (5.69%) compared to PULT (0.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PULT dropped -0.43% vs ENFR's -68.28%.

Which ETF is better, PULT or ENFR?

On 3-year performance, ENFR leads with 28.90% vs 5.32% for PULT. On fees, PULT is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, PULT has been the lower-risk option at 0.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PULT or ENFR?

Over the 3-year period, ENFR has performed better with a 28.90% return vs 5.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PULT or ENFR?

PULT is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for ENFR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PULT or ENFR?

PULT has the higher dividend yield at 4.25%, compared with 4.02% for ENFR.

What is the main difference between PULT and ENFR?

PULT is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while ENFR is Energy Equities. They also come from different issuers: Putnam and SS&C. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for PULT and 0.35% for ENFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PULT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.45 vs 1.88), 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.