CLOZ vs. UYLD

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

CLOZ (Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF) and UYLD (Angel Oak Ultrashort Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CLOZ is a CLO fund actively managed by Panagram, while UYLD is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Angel Oak. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, CLOZ returned 10.63%/yr vs 5.89%/yr for UYLD. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CLOZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for UYLD.

Performance

CLOZ vs. UYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) and Angel Oak Ultrashort Income ETF (UYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CLOZ achieves a 2.55% return, which is significantly higher than UYLD's 1.92% return.

CLOZ

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 1.08%
• YTD: 2.55%
• 6M: 3.27%
• 1Y: 6.17%
• 3Y*: 10.63%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

UYLD

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.63%
• YTD: 1.92%
• 6M: 2.40%
• 1Y: 5.17%
• 3Y*: 5.89%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CLOZ vs. UYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CLOZ Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF	2.55%	5.99%	11.85%	14.92%
UYLD Angel Oak Ultrashort Income ETF	1.92%	5.36%	6.10%	6.08%

Correlation

The correlation between CLOZ and UYLD is 0.05, 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	0.05
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 25, 2023	0.01

Return for Risk

CLOZ vs. UYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

CLOZ

CLOZ Risk / Return Rank: 48
CLOZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 51
CLOZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 46
CLOZ Omega Ratio Rank: 75
CLOZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
CLOZ Martin Ratio Rank: 34

UYLD

UYLD Risk / Return Rank: 99
UYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
UYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
UYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 99
UYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
UYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

CLOZ vs. UYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) and Angel Oak Ultrashort Income ETF (UYLD). 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.

	CLOZ	UYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.79	7.98	-6.18
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.29	21.80	-19.51
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	4.32	-2.87
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.56	37.68	-36.12
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	5.19	223.70	-218.51
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CLOZ vs. UYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CLOZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is lower than the UYLD Sharpe Ratio of 7.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CLOZ and UYLD, 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

	CLOZ	UYLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.79	7.98	-6.18
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.77	5.99	-3.22

Drawdowns

CLOZ vs. UYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CLOZ drawdown since its inception was -5.32%, which is greater than UYLD's maximum drawdown of -0.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CLOZ and UYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	CLOZ	UYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.32%	-0.54%	-4.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.90%	-0.14%	-3.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.32%	-0.54%	-4.78%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.10%	0.00%	-0.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.38%	-0.03%	-0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.17%	0.02%	+1.15%

Volatility

CLOZ vs. UYLD - Volatility Comparison

Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF (CLOZ) has a higher volatility of 0.55% compared to Angel Oak Ultrashort Income ETF (UYLD) at 0.39%. This indicates that CLOZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than UYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CLOZ	UYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.55%	0.39%	+0.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.13%	0.51%	+2.62%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.45%	0.65%	+2.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.81%	1.00%	+2.81%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.81%	1.00%	+2.81%

CLOZ vs. UYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

CLOZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than UYLD's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

CLOZ vs. UYLD - Dividend Comparison

CLOZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.01%, more than UYLD's 5.03% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
CLOZ Panagram Bbb-B Clo ETF	8.01%	7.63%	9.09%	8.81%	0.00%
UYLD Angel Oak Ultrashort Income ETF	5.03%	5.07%	4.97%	5.92%	0.75%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CLOZ and UYLD in my portfolio?

CLOZ and UYLD have a correlation of 0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CLOZ or UYLD?

CLOZ has higher volatility (0.55%) compared to UYLD (0.39%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CLOZ dropped -5.32% vs UYLD's -0.54%.

Which ETF is better, CLOZ or UYLD?

On 3-year performance, CLOZ leads with 10.63% vs 5.89% for UYLD. On fees, UYLD is cheaper at 0.29% per year. On volatility, UYLD has been the lower-risk option at 0.39%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CLOZ or UYLD?

Over the 3-year period, CLOZ has performed better with a 10.63% return vs 5.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CLOZ or UYLD?

UYLD is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CLOZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CLOZ or UYLD?

CLOZ has the higher dividend yield at 8.01%, compared with 5.03% for UYLD.

What is the main difference between CLOZ and UYLD?

CLOZ is categorized as CLO, while UYLD is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Panagram and Angel Oak. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CLOZ and 0.29% for UYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

UYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.98 vs 1.79), 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.