AAAC vs. PSQA

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

AAAC (Columbia AAA CLO ETF) and PSQA (Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF) are both CLO funds. AAAC is actively managed, while PSQA is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. AAAC charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for PSQA.

Performance

AAAC vs. PSQA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia AAA CLO ETF (AAAC) and Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF (PSQA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with AAAC having a 2.69% return and PSQA slightly higher at 2.79%.

AAAC

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.46%
• 6M: 2.48%
• YTD: 2.69%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PSQA

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 0.63%
• 6M: 2.43%
• YTD: 2.79%
• 1Y: 5.59%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

AAAC vs. PSQA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
AAAC Columbia AAA CLO ETF	2.69%	0.15%
PSQA Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF	2.79%	0.27%

Correlation

The correlation between AAAC and PSQA is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2025	-0.02

Return for Risk

AAAC vs. PSQA — Risk / Return Rank

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

AAAC

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

PSQA

PSQA Risk / Return Rank: 93
PSQA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PSQA Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
PSQA Omega Ratio Rank: 94
PSQA Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PSQA Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

AAAC vs. PSQA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia AAA CLO ETF (AAAC) and Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF (PSQA). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	AAAC	PSQA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.29	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	3.70	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.53	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	7.19	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	23.48	—

Drawdowns

AAAC vs. PSQA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum AAAC drawdown since its inception was -0.55%, smaller than the maximum PSQA drawdown of -1.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AAAC and PSQA.

Drawdown Indicators

	AAAC	PSQA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.55%	-1.25%	+0.70%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.78%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.10%	+0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.04%	-0.16%	+0.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.24%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	AAAC	PSQA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	1.21%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	2.07%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.85%	2.45%	-1.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.85%	2.35%	-1.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.85%	2.35%	-1.50%

AAAC vs. PSQA - Expense Ratio Comparison

AAAC has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than PSQA's 0.21% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

AAAC vs. PSQA - Dividend Comparison

AAAC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.65%, less than PSQA's 4.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
AAAC Columbia AAA CLO ETF	2.65%	0.03%	0.00%
PSQA Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF	4.12%	4.48%	1.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both AAAC and PSQA in my portfolio?

AAAC and PSQA have a correlation of -0.02, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, AAAC or PSQA?

On fees, AAAC is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, AAAC or PSQA?

AAAC is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.21% for PSQA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, AAAC or PSQA?

PSQA has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 2.65% for AAAC.

What is the main difference between AAAC and PSQA?

They also come from different issuers: Columbia Threadneedle and Palmer Square. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for AAAC and 0.21% for PSQA.