BWZ vs. CSHP
BWZ (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BWZ is a International Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Global Treasury (1-3 Y) Customized, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. BWZ is passively managed, while CSHP is actively managed. Over the past year, BWZ returned -1.90% vs 3.94% for CSHP. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. BWZ charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.
Performance
BWZ vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BWZ achieves a -1.98% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.83% return.
BWZ
- 1D
- -0.34%
- 1M
- -1.45%
- YTD
- -1.98%
- 6M
- -1.95%
- 1Y
- -1.90%
- 3Y*
- 2.03%
- 5Y*
- -1.91%
- 10Y*
- -0.60%
CSHP
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.27%
- YTD
- 1.83%
- 6M
- 1.92%
- 1Y
- 3.94%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BWZ vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | -1.98% | 10.47% | -2.24% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 1.83% | 4.10% | 2.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between BWZ and CSHP is -0.21, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.21 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024 | -0.09 |
The correlation between BWZ and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.21 (1 year) to -0.09 (all time), 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
BWZ vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank
BWZ
CSHP
BWZ vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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.
| BWZ | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -11.37 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -27.95 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.96 | 6.46 | -5.50 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.37 | 65.45 | -65.82 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.78 | 381.67 | -382.46 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BWZ vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BWZ drawdown since its inception was -34.23%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BWZ and CSHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BWZ | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.23% | -0.08% | -34.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.15% | -0.06% | -5.09% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.60% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.15% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -24.90% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -23.46% | -0.04% | -23.42% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.12% | -0.00% | -16.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.42% | 0.01% | +2.41% |
Volatility
BWZ vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) has a higher volatility of 1.78% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.16%. This indicates that BWZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BWZ | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.78% | 0.16% | +1.62% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.11% | 0.27% | +4.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.86% | 0.36% | +6.50% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 7.60% | 0.41% | +7.19% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.95% | 0.41% | +6.54% |
BWZ vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
BWZ has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
BWZ vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison
BWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.12%, less than CSHP's 3.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BWZ SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF | 2.12% | 2.05% | 2.47% | 1.63% | 0.44% | 0.60% | 0.13% | 0.43% | 1.10% | 0.40% | 0.13% | 0.06% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 3.91% | 5.39% | 1.96% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BWZ and CSHP have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BWZ has higher volatility (1.78%) compared to CSHP (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BWZ dropped -34.23% vs CSHP's -0.08%.
On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.94% vs -1.90% for BWZ. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.94% return vs -1.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for BWZ.
CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 2.12% for BWZ.
BWZ is categorized as International Government Bonds, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for BWZ and 0.20% for CSHP.
CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.09 vs -0.28), 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 BWZ and CSHP
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