PUSH vs. PULS

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) and PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS).

PUSH and PULS are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PUSH is an actively managed fund by PGIM. It was launched on Jun 24, 2024. PULS is an actively managed fund by PGIM. It was launched on Apr 5, 2018.

Performance

PUSH vs. PULS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) and PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

PUSH vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF	0.64%	4.16%	1.74%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	0.89%	4.97%	2.99%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PUSH achieves a 0.64% return, which is significantly lower than PULS's 0.89% return.

PUSH

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -0.37%
• YTD: 0.64%
• 6M: 1.46%
• 1Y: 3.70%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PULS

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.09%
• YTD: 0.89%
• 6M: 2.04%
• 1Y: 4.71%
• 3Y*: 5.67%
• 5Y*: 3.98%
• 10Y*: —

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

PUSH vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both PUSH and PULS have an expense ratio of 0.15%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

PUSH

PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF

PULS

PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF

Return for Risk

PUSH vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank

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

PUSH

PUSH Risk / Return Rank: 95
PUSH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
PUSH Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
PUSH Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PUSH Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PUSH Martin Ratio Rank: 95

PULS

PULS Risk / Return Rank: 99
PULS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Omega Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

PUSH vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) and PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS). 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.

	PUSH	PULS	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.27	9.19	-6.93
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.31	18.25	-14.95
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	5.27	-3.66
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.34	13.80	-9.47
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.34	95.35	-80.01
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PUSH vs. PULS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PUSH Sharpe Ratio is 2.27, which is lower than the PULS Sharpe Ratio of 9.19. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PUSH and PULS, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PUSH	PULS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.27	9.19	-6.93
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	5.72	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.84	2.46	+0.38

Correlation

The correlation between PUSH and PULS is 0.19, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

PUSH vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison

PUSH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.60%, less than PULS's 5.09% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
PUSH PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF	3.60%	3.45%	1.86%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	5.09%	4.78%	5.62%	5.48%	2.30%	1.19%	1.85%	2.69%	1.87%

Drawdowns

PUSH vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PUSH drawdown since its inception was -0.85%, smaller than the maximum PULS drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PUSH and PULS.

Drawdown Indicators

	PUSH	PULS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.85%	-5.85%	+5.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.85%	-0.34%	-0.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-0.79%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.37%	0.00%	-0.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.11%	-0.09%	-0.02%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.24%	0.05%	+0.19%

Volatility

PUSH vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Ultra Short Municipal Bond ETF (PUSH) has a higher volatility of 0.23% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) at 0.15%. This indicates that PUSH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PULS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PUSH	PULS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.23%	0.15%	+0.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.08%	0.28%	+0.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.64%	0.51%	+1.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.33%	0.70%	+0.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.33%	1.34%	-0.01%