AWF vs. CCLFX
AWF (AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund) and CCLFX (Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund Class I Shares) are both mutual funds - AWF is a High Yield Bonds fund actively managed by AllianceBernstein, while CCLFX is a Bank Loan fund managed by Cliffwater. Over the past 5 years, AWF returned 3.59%/yr vs 8.72%/yr for CCLFX. Their 0.09 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. AWF charges 1.00%/yr vs 3.27%/yr for CCLFX.
Performance
AWF vs. CCLFX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, AWF achieves a -1.31% return, which is significantly lower than CCLFX's 3.28% return.
AWF
- 1D
- 0.50%
- 1M
- -0.59%
- 6M
- -1.56%
- YTD
- -1.31%
- 1Y
- -1.92%
- 3Y*
- 8.78%
- 5Y*
- 3.59%
- 10Y*
- 5.40%
- ALL TIME*
- 6.27%
CCLFX
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.49%
- 6M
- 2.89%
- YTD
- 3.28%
- 1Y
- 6.75%
- 3Y*
- 10.13%
- 5Y*
- 8.72%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 8.48%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $2.79M | $3.34M | $3.76M | |
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
AWF vs. CCLFX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AWF AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund | -1.31% | 7.54% | 14.30% | 18.37% | -16.62% | 9.95% | 4.40% | 9.25% |
CCLFX Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund Class I Shares | 3.28% | 8.93% | 12.62% | 12.66% | 2.32% | 10.38% | 8.73% | 2.12% |
Correlation
The correlation between AWF and CCLFX is 0.12, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.12 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.10 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2019 | 0.09 |
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
AWF vs. CCLFX — Risk / Return Rank
AWF
CCLFX
AWF vs. CCLFX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund (AWF) and Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund Class I Shares (CCLFX). 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.
| AWF | CCLFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -8.32 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -18.72 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 6.72 | -5.75 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.19 | 35.94 | -36.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.40 | 197.36 | -197.76 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
AWF vs. CCLFX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum AWF drawdown since its inception was -55.54%, which is greater than CCLFX's maximum drawdown of -3.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for AWF and CCLFX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| AWF | CCLFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.54% | -3.91% | -51.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.19% | -0.19% | -10.00% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.12% | -0.46% | -10.66% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.25% | -2.25% | -23.00% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.12% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.43% | 0.00% | -5.43% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.27% | -0.16% | -12.11% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.81% | 0.03% | +4.78% |
Volatility
AWF vs. CCLFX - Volatility Comparison
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund (AWF) has a higher volatility of 1.77% compared to Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund Class I Shares (CCLFX) at 0.20%. This indicates that AWF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCLFX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| AWF | CCLFX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.77% | 0.20% | +1.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.47% | 0.63% | +6.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.48% | 0.85% | +7.63% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.09% | 1.73% | +10.36% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.18% | 1.86% | +13.32% |
AWF vs. CCLFX - Expense Ratio Comparison
AWF has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is lower than CCLFX's 3.27% expense ratio.
Dividends
AWF vs. CCLFX - Dividend Comparison
AWF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.75%, less than CCLFX's 10.08% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AWF AllianceBernstein Global High Income Closed Fund | 7.75% | 7.81% | 7.47% | 7.33% | 10.30% | 6.48% | 6.68% | 6.62% | 7.97% | 6.03% | 7.73% | 10.28% |
CCLFX Cliffwater Corporate Lending Fund Class I Shares | 10.08% | 10.47% | 11.27% | 10.96% | 3.96% | 7.03% | 6.90% | 0.61% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
AWF and CCLFX have a correlation of 0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
AWF has higher volatility (1.77%) compared to CCLFX (0.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, AWF dropped -55.54% vs CCLFX's -3.91%.
CCLFX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (8.10 vs -0.23), 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 AWF and CCLFX
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