A
vs
B
Share
Compare their flowsAsk IQ about these two funds

DUSB vs PULS: Differences, Returns & Fees

DUSB's duration was 0.9 years on Jul 31, 2026 and PULS's 0.7 on May 29, 2026; both charge 0.15%. Net assets: $2.2bn on Jul 31, 2026 for Dimensional Ultrashort Fixed Income ETF, and $19.8bn on Oct 19, 2026 for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF.

Ask IQ about this page

Ask IQ about DUSB and PULS

Answers cite the figures on this page.

Both cost 0.15% a year; their one-year returns differ by 0.5 points.

DUSB vs PULS: Differences, Returns & Fees
DUSBPULS
Expense ratio0.15%0.15%
Net assets, DUSB as of Jul 31, 2026 and PULS as of Oct 19, 2026$2.2bn$19.8bn
Total return, 1 year+3.6%+4.1%
What it tracksNo index, actively managedNo index, actively managed
Holdings in commonreport dates differ

Holdings in common uses holdings dated May 29, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026.

+3.6%
DUSB total return, 1 year
+4.1%
PULS total return, 1 year
0.15%
DUSB expense ratio
0.15%
PULS expense ratio

Get PULS's fund flows by email, every Monday.

Plus the Friday ETF note. Confirm from the link that arrives, and unsubscribe in one click. See Privacy.

Client brief · page 1 of 2Report BR-E7A0FF28C1

DUSB and PULS are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?

  1. Size. DUSB has $2.2bn in net assets and PULS $19.8bn (net assets, DUSB as of Jul 31, 2026 and PULS as of Oct 19, 2026); PULS is 9.0 times larger.
  2. What each follows (similar). Both follow No index, actively managed.
  3. One-year total return (similar). Over 1 year to Oct 20, 2026 DUSB returned +3.6% and PULS +4.1% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 0.5 points.

Data as of Oct 20, 2026. The differences are picked by a fixed rule, in a fixed order; the PDF prints it. Page 2 has the returns, overlap, risks and sources.

Take this comparison to a client

The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.

Not advice. The brief uses the figures on this page, with the data date and a report id. Saved comparisons are listed on your saved page; privacy.

On the same fields

DUSB
Dimensional Ultrashort Fixed Income ETF
PULS
PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF
Where it sits Bond ETF Bond ETF
Issuer Dimensional PGIM
What it is Actively managed Actively managed
Total return, 1 year +3.6% +4.1%
Expense ratio 0.15% 0.15%
Holdings 564 553
Net assets, DUSB as of Jul 31, 2026 and PULS as of Oct 19, 2026 $2.2bn $19.8bn

DUSB and PULS on the fields both publish, as of Oct 20, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

About DUSB

DUSB is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +3.6% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year.

About PULS

PULS is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +4.1% with distributions reinvested.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DUSB or PULS?
In the year to Oct 20, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DUSB returned +3.6% and PULS +4.1%.
Which is cheaper, DUSB or PULS?
Neither: DUSB and PULS both charge 0.15% a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
DUSB vs JPSTDUSB vs SHVDUSB vs VBILDUSB vs FLOTPULS vs VRIGPULS vs VUSBFLOT vs PULSPULS vs SHV
DUSB on its own →PULS on its own →Hold both: look the portfolio through →Rankings →DUSB dividend history →DUSB holdings →PULS dividend history →PULS holdings →Standards and sources →
Where these figures came from
DUSB filings on SEC EDGAR ↗DUSB prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗Dimensional website ↗PULS filings on SEC EDGAR ↗PULS prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗PGIM website ↗

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure; a link is not an endorsement. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, DUSB against PULS, data as of Oct 20, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/dusb-vs-puls

Open data

Free to use with attribution for figures ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.