PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BGT vs. FFRSX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BGT vs. FFRSX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT) and Federated Hermes Floating Rate Strat Inc Fund (FFRSX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BGT achieves a -0.49% return, which is significantly lower than FFRSX's 1.02% return. Over the past 10 years, BGT has outperformed FFRSX with an annualized return of 6.13%, while FFRSX has yielded a comparatively lower 3.38% annualized return.


BGT

1D
-0.65%
1M
-0.58%
YTD
-0.49%
6M
1.38%
1Y
-1.80%
3Y*
10.35%
5Y*
6.89%
10Y*
6.13%

FFRSX

1D
0.00%
1M
0.34%
YTD
1.02%
6M
1.72%
1Y
4.70%
3Y*
6.46%
5Y*
3.33%
10Y*
3.38%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BGT vs. FFRSX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
BGT
BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust
-0.49%-0.84%16.12%26.29%-16.57%25.89%-0.81%18.97%-11.95%3.91%
FFRSX
Federated Hermes Floating Rate Strat Inc Fund
1.02%5.61%6.71%8.04%-5.85%3.73%0.45%6.71%0.38%3.54%

Correlation

The correlation between BGT and FFRSX is 0.06, 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 (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.06

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.11

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.19

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.22

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 7, 2010

0.19

The correlation between BGT and FFRSX shifts across timeframes, from 0.06 (1 year) to 0.22 (10 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

BGT vs. FFRSX — Risk / Return Rank

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

BGT
BGT Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
BGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
Sortino Ratio Rank
BGT Omega Ratio Rank: 22
Omega Ratio Rank
BGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
BGT Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

FFRSX
FFRSX Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
FFRSX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FFRSX Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
FFRSX Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
FFRSX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
FFRSX Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BGT vs. FFRSX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT) and Federated Hermes Floating Rate Strat Inc Fund (FFRSX). 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.


BGTFFRSXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-2.43

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-5.31

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.98

1.96

-0.98

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.16

4.41

-4.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.36

15.38

-15.74

BGT vs. FFRSX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BGT Sharpe Ratio is -0.17, which is lower than the FFRSX Sharpe Ratio of 2.26. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BGT and FFRSX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BGTFFRSXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.17

2.26

-2.43

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.51

1.37

-0.86

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.40

1.04

-0.64

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.29

1.22

-0.92

Drawdowns

BGT vs. FFRSX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BGT drawdown since its inception was -58.06%, which is greater than FFRSX's maximum drawdown of -17.13%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BGT and FFRSX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BGTFFRSXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-58.06%

-17.13%

-40.93%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.06%

-1.07%

-9.99%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.91%

-1.45%

-14.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.19%

-7.54%

-15.65%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.90%

-17.13%

-24.77%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.56%

0.00%

-6.56%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.12%

-0.91%

-7.21%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.99%

0.31%

+4.68%

Volatility

BGT vs. FFRSX - Volatility Comparison

BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT) has a higher volatility of 1.63% compared to Federated Hermes Floating Rate Strat Inc Fund (FFRSX) at 0.50%. This indicates that BGT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FFRSX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BGTFFRSXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.63%

0.50%

+1.13%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.13%

1.48%

+5.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.35%

2.09%

+8.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.57%

2.44%

+11.13%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.34%

3.24%

+12.10%

BGT vs. FFRSX - Expense Ratio Comparison

BGT has a 1.74% expense ratio, which is higher than FFRSX's 0.68% expense ratio.


Dividends

BGT vs. FFRSX - Dividend Comparison

BGT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.51%, more than FFRSX's 5.80% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BGT
BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust
13.51%12.74%11.22%10.36%6.87%5.55%7.58%6.33%6.64%5.03%5.03%6.04%
FFRSX
Federated Hermes Floating Rate Strat Inc Fund
5.80%6.38%6.95%6.88%4.15%2.92%3.37%4.62%4.41%3.68%3.76%3.71%

Frequently Asked Questions


BGT and FFRSX have a correlation of 0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BGT has higher volatility (1.63%) compared to FFRSX (0.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BGT dropped -58.06% vs FFRSX's -17.13%.

FFRSX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs -0.17), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BGT and FFRSX

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