CSNR vs. BWET

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CSNR (Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF) and BWET (Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CSNR is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Cohen & Steers, while BWET is a Commodities fund tracking the Breakwave Wet Freight Futures Index. CSNR is actively managed, while BWET is passively managed. Over the past year, CSNR returned 47.34% vs 1800.91% for BWET. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. CSNR charges 0.50%/yr vs 3.50%/yr for BWET.

Performance

CSNR vs. BWET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) and Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSNR achieves a 21.88% return, which is significantly lower than BWET's 875.88% return.

CSNR

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 1.40%
• YTD: 21.88%
• 6M: 24.62%
• 1Y: 47.34%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BWET

• 1D: 4.26%
• 1M: 9.15%
• YTD: 875.88%
• 6M: 735.56%
• 1Y: 1,800.91%
• 3Y*: 129.64%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CSNR vs. BWET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CSNR Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF	21.88%	26.55%
BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF	875.88%	52.71%

Correlation

The correlation between CSNR and BWET is -0.03, 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	-0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025	-0.01

Return for Risk

CSNR vs. BWET — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSNR

CSNR Risk / Return Rank: 86
CSNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
CSNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CSNR Omega Ratio Rank: 81
CSNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CSNR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

BWET

BWET Risk / Return Rank: 99
BWET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BWET Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
BWET Omega Ratio Rank: 97
BWET Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
BWET 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.

CSNR vs. BWET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) and Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET). 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.

	CSNR	BWET	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.81	18.57	-15.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.59	6.55	-2.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.96	-0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.67	59.51	-53.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	22.27	158.07	-135.79
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CSNR vs. BWET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSNR Sharpe Ratio is 2.81, which is lower than the BWET Sharpe Ratio of 18.57. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSNR and BWET, 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

	CSNR	BWET	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81	18.57	-15.76
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.97	1.90	+0.08

Drawdowns

CSNR vs. BWET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSNR drawdown since its inception was -15.33%, smaller than the maximum BWET drawdown of -56.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSNR and BWET.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSNR	BWET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.33%	-56.90%	+41.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.39%	-30.64%	+22.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-56.90%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.42%	-11.29%	+9.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.82%	-24.09%	+22.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.13%	11.51%	-9.38%

Volatility

CSNR vs. BWET - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF (CSNR) is 4.24%, while Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET) has a volatility of 33.96%. This indicates that CSNR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BWET based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CSNR	BWET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.24%	33.96%	-29.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.65%	88.49%	-74.84%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.94%	98.35%	-81.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.77%	70.45%	-50.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.77%	70.45%	-50.68%

CSNR vs. BWET - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSNR has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BWET's 3.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSNR vs. BWET - Dividend Comparison

CSNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.98%, while BWET has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF	0.00%	0.00%
CSNR Cohen & Steers Natural Resources Active ETF	1.98%	2.39%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSNR and BWET in my portfolio?

CSNR and BWET have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CSNR or BWET?

BWET has higher volatility (33.96%) compared to CSNR (4.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSNR dropped -15.33% vs BWET's -56.90%.

Which ETF is better, CSNR or BWET?

On 1-year performance, BWET leads with 1800.91% vs 47.34% for CSNR. On fees, CSNR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CSNR has been the lower-risk option at 4.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CSNR or BWET?

Over the 1-year period, BWET has performed better with a 1800.91% return vs 47.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSNR or BWET?

CSNR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 3.50% for BWET.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CSNR or BWET?

CSNR has the higher dividend yield at 1.98%, compared with 0.00% for BWET.

What is the main difference between CSNR and BWET?

CSNR is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while BWET is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for CSNR and 3.50% for BWET.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BWET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (18.57 vs 2.81), 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.