CSPF vs. PFFV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CSPF (Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF) and PFFV (Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. CSPF is actively managed, while PFFV is passively managed. Over the past year, CSPF returned 9.14% vs 5.19% for PFFV. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSPF charges 0.59%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for PFFV.

Performance

CSPF vs. PFFV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF (CSPF) and Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF (PFFV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSPF achieves a 2.65% return, which is significantly lower than PFFV's 2.93% return.

CSPF

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 0.65%
• YTD: 2.65%
• 6M: 2.72%
• 1Y: 9.14%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PFFV

• 1D: -0.05%
• 1M: 0.45%
• YTD: 2.93%
• 6M: 2.88%
• 1Y: 5.19%
• 3Y*: 7.51%
• 5Y*: 2.24%
• 10Y*: —

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

CSPF vs. PFFV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CSPF Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF	2.65%	8.03%
PFFV Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF	2.93%	0.01%

Correlation

The correlation between CSPF and PFFV is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025	0.39

Return for Risk

CSPF vs. PFFV — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSPF

CSPF Risk / Return Rank: 71
CSPF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
CSPF Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
CSPF Omega Ratio Rank: 76
CSPF Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
CSPF Martin Ratio Rank: 73

PFFV

PFFV Risk / Return Rank: 33
PFFV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
PFFV Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
PFFV Omega Ratio Rank: 34
PFFV Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
PFFV Martin Ratio Rank: 31

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.

CSPF vs. PFFV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF (CSPF) and Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF (PFFV). 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.

	CSPF	PFFV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.26	1.27	+0.99
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.25	1.88	+1.37
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.23	+0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.00	1.61	+1.39
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.63	4.52	+9.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CSPF vs. PFFV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSPF Sharpe Ratio is 2.26, which is higher than the PFFV Sharpe Ratio of 1.27. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSPF and PFFV, 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

	CSPF	PFFV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.26	1.27	+0.99
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.26	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.96	0.56	+1.41

Drawdowns

CSPF vs. PFFV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSPF drawdown since its inception was -3.06%, smaller than the maximum PFFV drawdown of -18.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSPF and PFFV.

Drawdown Indicators

	CSPF	PFFV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.06%	-18.96%	+15.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.06%	-3.23%	+0.17%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-6.07%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.32%	-0.31%	-0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.44%	-4.18%	+3.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.67%	1.15%	-0.48%

Volatility

CSPF vs. PFFV - Volatility Comparison

Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF (CSPF) has a higher volatility of 1.08% compared to Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF (PFFV) at 0.79%. This indicates that CSPF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PFFV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CSPF	PFFV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.08%	0.79%	+0.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.03%	2.84%	+0.19%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.07%	4.12%	-0.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.17%	8.84%	-4.67%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.17%	8.69%	-4.52%

CSPF vs. PFFV - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSPF has a 0.59% expense ratio, which is higher than PFFV's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CSPF vs. PFFV - Dividend Comparison

CSPF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.16%, less than PFFV's 8.12% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
CSPF Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF	5.16%	4.63%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PFFV Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF	8.12%	8.26%	7.33%	7.17%	6.60%	5.23%	2.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CSPF and PFFV in my portfolio?

CSPF and PFFV have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CSPF or PFFV?

CSPF has higher volatility (1.08%) compared to PFFV (0.79%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSPF dropped -3.06% vs PFFV's -18.96%.

Which ETF is better, CSPF or PFFV?

On 1-year performance, CSPF leads with 9.14% vs 5.19% for PFFV. On fees, PFFV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, PFFV has been the lower-risk option at 0.79%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CSPF or PFFV?

Over the 1-year period, CSPF has performed better with a 9.14% return vs 5.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CSPF or PFFV?

PFFV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for CSPF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CSPF or PFFV?

PFFV has the higher dividend yield at 8.12%, compared with 5.16% for CSPF.

What is the main difference between CSPF and PFFV?

They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.59% for CSPF and 0.25% for PFFV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSPF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.26 vs 1.27), 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.