CSIO vs. NZAC

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

CSIO (Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF) and NZAC (SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF) are both Global Equities funds. CSIO is actively managed, while NZAC is passively managed. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSIO charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for NZAC.

Performance

CSIO vs. NZAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF (CSIO) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSIO achieves a 17.22% return, which is significantly higher than NZAC's 7.28% return.

CSIO

• 1D: 0.56%
• 1M: 0.90%
• 6M: 15.16%
• YTD: 17.22%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NZAC

• 1D: -0.76%
• 1M: -0.61%
• 6M: 6.08%
• YTD: 7.28%
• 1Y: 18.06%
• 3Y*: 16.58%
• 5Y*: 9.54%
• 10Y*: 11.76%

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

CSIO vs. NZAC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CSIO Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF	17.22%	0.82%
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	7.28%	0.65%

Correlation

The correlation between CSIO and NZAC is 0.26, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2025	0.26

Return for Risk

CSIO vs. NZAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSIO

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

NZAC

NZAC Risk / Return Rank: 47
NZAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
NZAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
NZAC Omega Ratio Rank: 44
NZAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
NZAC Martin Ratio Rank: 54

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.

CSIO vs. NZAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF (CSIO) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). 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.

	CSIO	NZAC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	1.32	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	1.88	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.24	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	1.80	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	7.32	—

Drawdowns

CSIO vs. NZAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSIO drawdown since its inception was -5.86%, smaller than the maximum NZAC drawdown of -33.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSIO and NZAC.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSIO	NZAC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.86%	-33.72%	+27.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-10.10%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.19%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.31%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-33.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.03%	-2.23%	+2.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.08%	-5.29%	+4.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	2.47%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CSIO	NZAC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	3.77%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	11.51%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.22%	13.75%	-2.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.22%	16.95%	-5.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.22%	17.04%	-5.82%

CSIO vs. NZAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSIO has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than NZAC's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSIO vs. NZAC - Dividend Comparison

CSIO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, less than NZAC's 2.07% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSIO Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Opportunities Active ETF	1.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NZAC SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF	2.07%	1.90%	1.88%	1.65%	1.81%	1.62%	1.59%	2.17%	2.53%	2.20%	2.00%	2.40%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSIO and NZAC in my portfolio?

CSIO and NZAC have a correlation of 0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CSIO or NZAC?

On fees, NZAC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSIO or NZAC?

NZAC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CSIO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CSIO or NZAC?

NZAC has the higher dividend yield at 2.07%, compared with 1.44% for CSIO.

What is the main difference between CSIO and NZAC?

They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for CSIO and 0.12% for NZAC.