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

ICSH vs PULS: Differences, Returns & Fees

ICSH's duration was 0.7 years on Jul 31, 2026 and PULS's 0.7 on May 29, 2026; ICSH charges 0.08% to PULS's 0.15%. Net assets: $9.0bn on Oct 20, 2026 for iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF, and $19.8bn on Oct 19, 2026 for PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF.

Ask IQ about this page

Ask IQ about ICSH and PULS

Answers cite the figures on this page.

ICSH costs 0.07 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 0.6 points; PULS is 2.2 times larger.

ICSH vs PULS: Differences, Returns & Fees
ICSHPULS
Expense ratio0.08%0.15%
Net assets, as of Oct 19, 2026$9.0bn$19.8bn
Total return, 1 year+3.5%+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.

+3.5%
ICSH total return, 1 year
+4.1%
PULS total return, 1 year
0.08%
ICSH expense ratio
0.15%
PULS expense ratio

Get ICSH and PULS 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-5BC7F8CB85

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

  1. What each follows (similar). Both follow No index, actively managed.
  2. One-year total return (similar). Over 1 year to Oct 20, 2026 ICSH returned +3.5% and PULS +4.1% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 0.6 points.
  3. Number of holdings (similar). ICSH holds 407 positions and PULS holds 553.

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

ICSH
iShares Ultra Short Duration Bond Active ETF
PULS
PGIM Ultra Short Bond ETF
Where it sits Bond ETF Bond ETF
Issuer iShares PGIM
What it is Actively managed Actively managed
Total return, 1 year +3.5% +4.1%
Expense ratio 0.08% 0.15%
Holdings 407 553
Net assets, ICSH as of Oct 20, 2026 and PULS as of Oct 19, 2026 $9.0bn $19.8bn

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

About ICSH

ICSH is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 20, 2026 it returned +3.5% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% 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. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, ICSH or PULS?
In the year to Oct 20, 2026, with distributions reinvested, ICSH returned +3.5% and PULS +4.1%.
Which is cheaper, ICSH or PULS?
ICSH is cheaper, by 0.07 percentage points a year. That is about $7 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
ICSH vs VBILICSH vs VUSBICSH vs JPSTICSH vs TBILPULS vs VUSBPULS vs TBILPULS vs TFLOFLOT vs PULS
ICSH on its own →PULS on its own →Hold both: look the portfolio through →Rankings →ICSH dividend history →ICSH holdings →PULS dividend history →PULS holdings →Standards and sources →
Where these figures came from
ICSH filings on SEC EDGAR ↗ICSH prospectus with the expense ratio (SEC) ↗iShares page for ICSH ↗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, ICSH against PULS, data as of Oct 20, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/icsh-vs-puls

Open data

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