ACCBX vs. NU
ACCBX (Invesco Corporate Bond Fund) is Corporate Bonds fund managed by Invesco, while NU (Nu Holdings Ltd.) is a stock. Over the past 3 years, ACCBX returned 5.28%/yr vs 19.62%/yr for NU. At a 0.16 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.
Performance
ACCBX vs. NU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACCBX achieves a 0.62% return, which is significantly higher than NU's -28.73% return.
ACCBX
- 1D
- -0.16%
- 1M
- 0.57%
- YTD
- 0.62%
- 6M
- 0.72%
- 1Y
- 6.63%
- 3Y*
- 5.28%
- 5Y*
- 0.04%
- 10Y*
- 2.96%
NU
- 1D
- -8.16%
- 1M
- -17.38%
- YTD
- -28.73%
- 6M
- -32.25%
- 1Y
- -0.58%
- 3Y*
- 19.62%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ACCBX vs. NU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACCBX Invesco Corporate Bond Fund | 0.62% | 7.34% | 2.87% | 7.01% | -16.72% | 0.08% |
NU Nu Holdings Ltd. | -28.73% | 61.58% | 24.37% | 104.67% | -56.61% | -9.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACCBX and NU is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.13 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2021 | 0.16 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ACCBX vs. NU — Risk / Return Rank
ACCBX
NU
ACCBX vs. NU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Corporate Bond Fund (ACCBX) and Nu Holdings Ltd. (NU). 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.
| ACCBX | NU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 1.55 | -0.02 | +1.57 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.29 | 0.25 | +2.05 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.29 | 1.03 | +0.26 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.09 | -0.02 | +2.11 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.25 | -0.05 | +7.30 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| ACCBX | NU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.55 | -0.02 | +1.57 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.01 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.52 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.51 | 0.06 | +0.46 |
Drawdowns
ACCBX vs. NU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACCBX drawdown since its inception was -45.26%, smaller than the maximum NU drawdown of -72.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACCBX and NU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACCBX | NU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -45.26% | -72.07% | +26.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.46% | -36.41% | +32.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.72% | -39.58% | +32.86% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.59% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -23.59% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.72% | -36.41% | +33.69% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.86% | -29.74% | +18.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.00% | 13.93% | -12.93% |
Volatility
ACCBX vs. NU - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco Corporate Bond Fund (ACCBX) is 1.43%, while Nu Holdings Ltd. (NU) has a volatility of 13.41%. This indicates that ACCBX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACCBX | NU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.43% | 13.41% | -11.98% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.04% | 28.38% | -25.34% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.09% | 38.61% | -34.52% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.28% | 58.47% | -52.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.73% | 58.47% | -52.74% |
Dividends
ACCBX vs. NU - Dividend Comparison
ACCBX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.00%, while NU has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACCBX Invesco Corporate Bond Fund | 5.00% | 4.95% | 4.63% | 3.78% | 3.84% | 4.91% | 5.98% | 3.67% | 4.22% | 4.13% | 3.64% | 3.88% |
NU Nu Holdings Ltd. | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACCBX and NU have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
NU has higher volatility (13.41%) compared to ACCBX (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACCBX dropped -45.26% vs NU's -72.07%.
ACCBX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.55 vs -0.02), 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.
Find the right allocation for ACCBX and NU
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer