Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
CGBL vs PULS: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, CGBL returned +7.1% to PULS's +4.0%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about CGBL and PULS
Net assets on Oct 27, 2026: $7.9bn for Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and $19.8bn for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF.
Pair scorecard
PULS costs 0.18 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 3.1 points; PULS is 2.5 times larger.
| Measure | CGBL | PULS |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +7.1% | +4.0% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 3.4%, high on Aug 13, 2026 | |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | No index, actively managed |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.33% | 0.15% |
| Net assets, as of Oct 27, 2026 | $7.9bn | $19.8bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 0% | |
| In the S&P 500, by weight | 48% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 59.3% | |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated May 29, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026. Method
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, CGBL and PULS hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated May 29, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.
half
0% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
CGBL and PULS on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +7.1% with distributions reinvested, against +7.5% for its benchmark, the 60%/40% S&P 500 Index/Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Index.
CGBL is actively managed and tracks no index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 48% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 77 positions, with the top ten at 59.3%. It sat 3.4% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
PULS
PULS is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +4.0% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or PULS?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +7.1% and PULS +4.0%.
- Which is cheaper, CGBL or PULS?
- PULS is cheaper, by 0.18 percentage points a year. That is about $18 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, CGBL against PULS, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgbl-vs-puls
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). CGBL against PULS. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgbl-vs-puls
[CGBL against PULS (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/cgbl-vs-puls)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.