VNLA vs. PULS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

VNLA (Janus Henderson Short Duration Income ETF) and PULS (PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. VNLA is passively managed, while PULS is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, VNLA returned 3.79%/yr vs 4.12%/yr for PULS. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. VNLA charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for PULS.

Performance

VNLA vs. PULS - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VNLA achieves a 1.43% return, which is significantly lower than PULS's 1.73% return.

VNLA

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.37%
• YTD: 1.43%
• 6M: 1.85%
• 1Y: 4.75%
• 3Y*: 5.76%
• 5Y*: 3.79%
• 10Y*: —

PULS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 1.73%
• 6M: 2.09%
• 1Y: 4.70%
• 3Y*: 5.61%
• 5Y*: 4.12%
• 10Y*: —

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

VNLA vs. PULS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
VNLA Janus Henderson Short Duration Income ETF	1.43%	5.45%	6.41%	6.09%	-0.17%	-0.18%	3.01%	4.43%	-0.20%
PULS PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF	1.73%	4.97%	6.12%	6.26%	1.52%	0.48%	1.47%	2.97%	1.71%

Correlation

The correlation between VNLA and PULS is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.45
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2018	0.34

The correlation between VNLA and PULS shifts across timeframes, from 0.34 (all time) to 0.46 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

VNLA vs. PULS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VNLA	PULS
Energy	66.7%	-
Industrials	33.3%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	1.5%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

VNLA vs. PULS — Risk / Return Rank

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

VNLA

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

PULS

PULS Risk / Return Rank: 100
PULS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Omega Ratio Rank: 100
PULS Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
PULS Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

VNLA vs. PULS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Janus Henderson Short Duration Income ETF (VNLA) 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.

	VNLA	PULS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	7.55	11.41	-3.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	15.48	32.91	-17.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	3.58	7.59	-4.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	11.15	52.47	-41.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	57.27	318.56	-261.28
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

VNLA vs. PULS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VNLA Sharpe Ratio is 7.55, which is lower than the PULS Sharpe Ratio of 11.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VNLA and PULS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	VNLA	PULS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	7.55	11.41	-3.86
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	3.66	5.92	-2.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.10	2.51	-0.41

Drawdowns

VNLA vs. PULS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VNLA drawdown since its inception was -4.49%, smaller than the maximum PULS drawdown of -5.85%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VNLA and PULS.

Drawdown Indicators

	VNLA	PULS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.49%	-5.85%	+1.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.43%	-0.09%	-0.34%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.49%	-0.34%	-0.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-1.76%	-0.79%	-0.97%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	0.00%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.23%	-0.09%	-0.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.08%	0.01%	+0.07%

Volatility

VNLA vs. PULS - Volatility Comparison

Janus Henderson Short Duration Income ETF (VNLA) has a higher volatility of 0.18% compared to PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF (PULS) at 0.11%. This indicates that VNLA'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

	VNLA	PULS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.18%	0.11%	+0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.46%	0.30%	+0.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.63%	0.41%	+0.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.04%	0.70%	+0.34%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.42%	1.33%	+0.09%

VNLA vs. PULS - Expense Ratio Comparison

VNLA has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than PULS's 0.15% 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

VNLA vs. PULS - Dividend Comparison

VNLA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.78%, more than PULS's 4.58% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
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%
VNLA Janus Henderson Short Duration Income ETF	4.78%	4.84%	4.97%	3.95%	4.35%	1.67%	1.21%	3.13%	2.43%	1.79%	0.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VNLA and PULS in my portfolio?

VNLA and PULS have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VNLA or PULS?

VNLA has higher volatility (0.18%) compared to PULS (0.11%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VNLA dropped -4.49% vs PULS's -5.85%.

Which ETF is better, VNLA or PULS?

On 5-year performance, PULS leads with 4.12% vs 3.79% for VNLA. On fees, PULS is cheaper at 0.15% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VNLA or PULS?

Over the 5-year period, PULS has performed better with a 4.12% return vs 3.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VNLA or PULS?

PULS is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for VNLA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, VNLA or PULS?

VNLA has the higher dividend yield at 4.78%, compared with 4.58% for PULS.

What is the main difference between VNLA and PULS?

They also come from different issuers: Janus Henderson and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for VNLA and 0.15% for PULS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PULS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.41 vs 7.55), 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.