BSJQ vs. ICLO

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BSJQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 High Yield Corp Bond ETF) and ICLO (Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BSJQ is a High Yield Bonds fund tracking the NASDAQ BulletShares USD High Yield Corporate Bond 2026 TR Index, while ICLO is a CLO fund actively managed by Invesco. BSJQ is passively managed, while ICLO is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BSJQ returned 6.94%/yr vs 6.75%/yr for ICLO. At a 0.08 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BSJQ charges 0.42%/yr vs 0.26%/yr for ICLO.

Performance

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco BulletShares 2026 High Yield Corp Bond ETF (BSJQ) and Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF (ICLO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSJQ achieves a 0.85% return, which is significantly lower than ICLO's 2.11% return.

BSJQ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.28%
• YTD: 0.85%
• 6M: 1.28%
• 1Y: 4.62%
• 3Y*: 6.94%
• 5Y*: 3.74%
• 10Y*: —

ICLO

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 2.11%
• 6M: 2.50%
• 1Y: 5.71%
• 3Y*: 6.75%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BSJQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 High Yield Corp Bond ETF	0.85%	6.59%	7.49%	9.83%	-0.79%
ICLO Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF	2.11%	5.27%	7.05%	8.90%	0.38%

Correlation

The correlation between BSJQ and ICLO is 0.12, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.12
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 12, 2022	0.08

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BSJQ	ICLO
Financial Services	39.0%	6.6%
Consumer Cyclical	7.0%	3.3%
Technology	5.0%	-
Real Estate	3.6%	-
Industrials	2.1%	-
Communication Services	1.8%	-
Energy	1.6%	-
Basic Materials	-	2.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BSJQ vs. ICLO — Risk / Return Rank

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

BSJQ

BSJQ Risk / Return Rank: 95
BSJQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
BSJQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
BSJQ Omega Ratio Rank: 95
BSJQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
BSJQ Martin Ratio Rank: 97

ICLO

ICLO Risk / Return Rank: 97
ICLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
ICLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ICLO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ICLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ICLO Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2026 High Yield Corp Bond ETF (BSJQ) and Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF (ICLO). 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.

	BSJQ	ICLO	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.35	4.20	-0.85
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	5.25	7.14	-1.89
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.76	2.02	-0.26
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.57	16.31	-7.74
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	41.55	70.34	-28.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BSJQ Sharpe Ratio is 3.35, which is comparable to the ICLO Sharpe Ratio of 4.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BSJQ and ICLO, 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

	BSJQ	ICLO	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.35	4.20	-0.85
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.54	2.83	-2.29

Drawdowns

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSJQ drawdown since its inception was -24.13%, which is greater than ICLO's maximum drawdown of -3.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSJQ and ICLO.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSJQ	ICLO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.13%	-3.47%	-20.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.54%	-0.35%	-0.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-2.66%	-3.47%	+0.81%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-11.95%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.43%	0.00%	-0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.17%	-0.06%	-2.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.11%	0.08%	+0.03%

Volatility

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Volatility Comparison

Invesco BulletShares 2026 High Yield Corp Bond ETF (BSJQ) has a higher volatility of 0.54% compared to Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF (ICLO) at 0.31%. This indicates that BSJQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ICLO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BSJQ	ICLO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.54%	0.31%	+0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.98%	0.78%	+0.20%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.38%	1.37%	+0.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.73%	2.42%	+3.31%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.45%	2.42%	+6.03%

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSJQ has a 0.42% expense ratio, which is higher than ICLO's 0.26% expense ratio.

Dividends

BSJQ vs. ICLO - Dividend Comparison

BSJQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.83%, more than ICLO's 5.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BSJQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 High Yield Corp Bond ETF	5.83%	6.10%	6.58%	6.58%	5.58%	4.27%	4.64%	4.59%	2.39%
ICLO Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF	5.12%	5.49%	6.51%	7.01%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BSJQ and ICLO in my portfolio?

BSJQ and ICLO 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.

Which is riskier, BSJQ or ICLO?

BSJQ has higher volatility (0.54%) compared to ICLO (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BSJQ dropped -24.13% vs ICLO's -3.47%.

Which ETF is better, BSJQ or ICLO?

On 3-year performance, BSJQ leads with 6.94% vs 6.75% for ICLO. On fees, ICLO is cheaper at 0.26% per year. On volatility, ICLO has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BSJQ or ICLO?

Over the 3-year period, BSJQ has performed better with a 6.94% return vs 6.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BSJQ or ICLO?

ICLO is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 0.42% for BSJQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BSJQ or ICLO?

BSJQ has the higher dividend yield at 5.83%, compared with 5.12% for ICLO.

What is the main difference between BSJQ and ICLO?

BSJQ is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while ICLO is CLO. Their fees differ too: 0.42% for BSJQ and 0.26% for ICLO.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.20 vs 3.35), 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.