ANGL vs. LONZ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ANGL (VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF) and LONZ (PIMCO Senior Loan Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - ANGL is a High Yield Bonds fund tracking the BofA Merrill Lynch US Fallen Angel High Yield Index, while LONZ is a Bank Loan fund actively managed by PIMCO. ANGL is passively managed, while LONZ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, ANGL returned 8.46%/yr vs 8.28%/yr for LONZ. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ANGL charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.62%/yr for LONZ.

Performance

ANGL vs. LONZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF (ANGL) and PIMCO Senior Loan Active Exchange-Traded Fund (LONZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ANGL achieves a 1.55% return, which is significantly lower than LONZ's 1.79% return.

ANGL

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 1.55%
• 6M: 1.64%
• 1Y: 8.16%
• 3Y*: 8.46%
• 5Y*: 3.44%
• 10Y*: 6.27%

LONZ

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 0.43%
• YTD: 1.79%
• 6M: 1.74%
• 1Y: 5.52%
• 3Y*: 8.28%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ANGL vs. LONZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
ANGL VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF	1.55%	9.04%	6.06%	12.52%	-1.23%
LONZ PIMCO Senior Loan Active Exchange-Traded Fund	1.79%	5.05%	9.85%	12.56%	0.80%

Correlation

The correlation between ANGL and LONZ is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.36
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 10, 2022	0.40

Return for Risk

ANGL vs. LONZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

ANGL

ANGL Risk / Return Rank: 52
ANGL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
ANGL Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
ANGL Omega Ratio Rank: 60
ANGL Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
ANGL Martin Ratio Rank: 50

LONZ

LONZ Risk / Return Rank: 72
LONZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
LONZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
LONZ Omega Ratio Rank: 90
LONZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 55
LONZ Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

ANGL vs. LONZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF (ANGL) and PIMCO Senior Loan Active Exchange-Traded Fund (LONZ). 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.

	ANGL	LONZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	2.46	-0.55
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.73	3.42	-0.70
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.59	-0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.02	2.73	-0.70
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	8.49	11.31	-2.82
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ANGL vs. LONZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ANGL Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the LONZ Sharpe Ratio of 2.46. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ANGL and LONZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ANGL	LONZ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	2.46	-0.55
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.45	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.68	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.74	2.34	-1.60

Drawdowns

ANGL vs. LONZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ANGL drawdown since its inception was -29.31%, which is greater than LONZ's maximum drawdown of -4.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ANGL and LONZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	ANGL	LONZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.31%	-4.19%	-25.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.05%	-2.03%	-2.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.48%	-4.19%	-1.29%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.25%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-29.31%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-0.05%	-0.25%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.30%	-0.47%	-2.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.96%	0.49%	+0.47%

Volatility

ANGL vs. LONZ - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF (ANGL) has a higher volatility of 1.37% compared to PIMCO Senior Loan Active Exchange-Traded Fund (LONZ) at 0.54%. This indicates that ANGL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LONZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ANGL	LONZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.37%	0.54%	+0.83%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.46%	2.05%	+1.41%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.31%	2.26%	+2.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.63%	3.21%	+4.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.28%	3.21%	+6.07%

ANGL vs. LONZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

ANGL has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than LONZ's 0.62% expense ratio.

Dividends

ANGL vs. LONZ - Dividend Comparison

ANGL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.37%, less than LONZ's 8.14% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ANGL VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF	6.37%	6.20%	6.29%	5.27%	4.72%	3.90%	4.67%	5.19%	5.99%	5.25%	5.34%	5.81%
LONZ PIMCO Senior Loan Active Exchange-Traded Fund	8.14%	6.60%	8.16%	8.29%	3.33%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ANGL and LONZ in my portfolio?

ANGL and LONZ have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ANGL or LONZ?

ANGL has higher volatility (1.37%) compared to LONZ (0.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ANGL dropped -29.31% vs LONZ's -4.19%.

Which ETF is better, ANGL or LONZ?

On 3-year performance, ANGL leads with 8.46% vs 8.28% for LONZ. On fees, ANGL is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, LONZ has been the lower-risk option at 0.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ANGL or LONZ?

Over the 3-year period, ANGL has performed better with a 8.46% return vs 8.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ANGL or LONZ?

ANGL is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.62% for LONZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ANGL or LONZ?

LONZ has the higher dividend yield at 8.14%, compared with 6.37% for ANGL.

What is the main difference between ANGL and LONZ?

ANGL is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while LONZ is Bank Loan. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for ANGL and 0.62% for LONZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LONZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 1.90), 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.