CSSD vs. ICVT
CSSD (Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF) and ICVT (iShares Convertible Bond ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. CSSD is actively managed, while ICVT is passively managed. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CSSD charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ICVT.
Performance
CSSD vs. ICVT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CSSD achieves a 3.12% return, which is significantly lower than ICVT's 20.52% return.
CSSD
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.50%
- 6M
- 2.57%
- YTD
- 3.12%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ICVT
- 1D
- -0.54%
- 1M
- -0.10%
- 6M
- 16.79%
- YTD
- 20.52%
- 1Y
- 31.84%
- 3Y*
- 17.59%
- 5Y*
- 6.33%
- 10Y*
- 13.39%
CSSD vs. ICVT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 3.12% | 0.49% |
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF | 20.52% | -1.51% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSSD and ICVT is 0.31, 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 | 0.31 |
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
CSSD vs. ICVT — Risk / Return Rank
CSSD
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ICVT
CSSD vs. ICVT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF (CSSD) and iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT). 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.
| CSSD | ICVT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.34 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.22 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 13.18 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CSSD vs. ICVT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSSD drawdown since its inception was -2.32%, smaller than the maximum ICVT drawdown of -33.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSSD and ICVT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSSD | ICVT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.32% | -33.25% | +30.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -7.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -11.22% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.95% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.25% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.16% | -5.02% | +4.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.28% | -9.44% | +9.16% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.41% | — |
Volatility
CSSD vs. ICVT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSSD | ICVT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 6.63% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.60% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.02% | 16.24% | -13.22% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.02% | 13.63% | -10.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.02% | 15.65% | -12.63% |
CSSD vs. ICVT - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSSD has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than ICVT's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
CSSD vs. ICVT - Dividend Comparison
CSSD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.14%, more than ICVT's 1.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 3.14% | 0.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF | 1.33% | 1.73% | 2.19% | 1.85% | 1.93% | 7.70% | 3.98% | 1.86% | 4.82% | 2.56% | 3.06% | 1.57% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CSSD and ICVT have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ICVT is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ICVT is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for CSSD.
CSSD has the higher dividend yield at 3.14%, compared with 1.33% for ICVT.
They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for CSSD and 0.20% for ICVT.
Find the right allocation for CSSD and ICVT
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