ACVT vs. CWB

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

ACVT (Advent Convertible Bond ETF) and CWB (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF) are both Convertible Bonds funds. ACVT is actively managed, while CWB is passively managed. Over the past year, ACVT returned 9.04% vs 25.29% for CWB. Their 0.59 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. ACVT charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CWB.

Performance

ACVT vs. CWB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Advent Convertible Bond ETF (ACVT) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ACVT achieves a 6.12% return, which is significantly lower than CWB's 16.87% return.

ACVT

• 1D: 0.31%
• 1M: -0.18%
• 6M: 5.24%
• YTD: 6.12%
• 1Y: 9.04%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.55%

CWB

• 1D: 1.63%
• 1M: -0.83%
• 6M: 11.02%
• YTD: 16.87%
• 1Y: 25.29%
• 3Y*: 15.88%
• 5Y*: 5.90%
• 10Y*: 11.75%
• ALL TIME*: 11.65%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ACVT Advent Convertible Bond ETF	$1.70K	$2.25K	$22.89K
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	$65.31M	$67.68M	$92.69M

ACVT vs. CWB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ACVT Advent Convertible Bond ETF	6.12%	8.04%
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	16.87%	16.37%

Correlation

The correlation between ACVT and CWB is 0.58, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 30, 2025	0.59

The correlation between ACVT and CWB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ACVT vs. CWB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ACVT

ACVT Risk / Return Rank: 59
ACVT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
ACVT Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
ACVT Omega Ratio Rank: 60
ACVT Calmar Ratio Rank: 51
ACVT Martin Ratio Rank: 55

CWB

CWB Risk / Return Rank: 62
CWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
CWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
CWB Omega Ratio Rank: 60
CWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 63
CWB Martin Ratio Rank: 66

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ACVT vs. CWB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Advent Convertible Bond ETF (ACVT) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB). 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.

	ACVT	CWB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.49	1.53	-0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.21	2.10	+0.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.27	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.84	2.29	-0.46
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.54	8.15	-1.61

ACVT vs. CWB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ACVT Sharpe Ratio is 1.49, which is comparable to the CWB Sharpe Ratio of 1.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ACVT and CWB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

ACVT vs. CWB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ACVT drawdown since its inception was -4.81%, smaller than the maximum CWB drawdown of -32.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACVT and CWB.

Drawdown Indicators

	ACVT	CWB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.81%	-32.06%	+27.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.81%	-11.08%	+6.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.92%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.41%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-32.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.29%	-6.45%	+6.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.82%	-6.16%	+5.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.35%	3.11%	-1.76%

Volatility

ACVT vs. CWB - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Advent Convertible Bond ETF (ACVT) is 1.72%, while SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) has a volatility of 6.02%. This indicates that ACVT experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CWB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ACVT	CWB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.72%	6.02%	-4.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.82%	13.92%	-9.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.93%	16.67%	-10.74%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.77%	13.48%	-7.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.77%	14.70%	-8.93%

ACVT vs. CWB - Expense Ratio Comparison

ACVT has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CWB's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

ACVT vs. CWB - Dividend Comparison

ACVT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.68%, more than CWB's 1.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ACVT Advent Convertible Bond ETF	1.53%	1.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	1.52%	1.69%	1.85%	1.97%	2.21%	1.97%	2.34%	3.03%	6.17%	4.25%	4.60%	7.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ACVT and CWB in my portfolio?

ACVT and CWB have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ACVT or CWB?

CWB has higher volatility (6.02%) compared to ACVT (1.72%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACVT dropped -4.81% vs CWB's -32.06%.

Which ETF is better, ACVT or CWB?

On 1-year performance, CWB leads with 25.29% vs 9.04% for ACVT. On fees, CWB is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, ACVT has been the lower-risk option at 1.72%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ACVT or CWB?

Over the 1-year period, CWB has performed better with a 25.29% return vs 9.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ACVT or CWB?

CWB is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for ACVT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ACVT or CWB?

ACVT and CWB have nearly identical dividend yields, around 1.53%.

What is the main difference between ACVT and CWB?

They also come from different issuers: Advent and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for ACVT and 0.40% for CWB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs 1.49), 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.