CSSD vs. PFF
CSSD (Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF) and PFF (iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. CSSD is actively managed, while PFF is passively managed. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSSD charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.46%/yr for PFF.
Performance
CSSD vs. PFF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CSSD achieves a 2.72% return, which is significantly higher than PFF's 1.44% return.
CSSD
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.68%
- YTD
- 2.72%
- 6M
- 2.91%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PFF
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- -1.04%
- YTD
- 1.44%
- 6M
- 1.15%
- 1Y
- 7.10%
- 3Y*
- 6.69%
- 5Y*
- 1.03%
- 10Y*
- 3.21%
CSSD vs. PFF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 2.72% | 0.49% |
PFF iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF | 1.44% | 0.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSSD and PFF is 0.58, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2025 | 0.58 |
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. PFF — Risk / Return Rank
CSSD
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
PFF
CSSD vs. PFF - 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 Preferred and Income Securities ETF (PFF). 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 | PFF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.17 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.35 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 4.07 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CSSD vs. PFF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSSD drawdown since its inception was -2.32%, smaller than the maximum PFF drawdown of -65.55%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSSD and PFF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSSD | PFF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.32% | -65.55% | +63.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -5.28% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -10.63% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -21.05% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.10% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.20% | -2.54% | +2.34% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.29% | -5.75% | +5.46% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.75% | — |
Volatility
CSSD vs. PFF - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSSD | PFF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 2.42% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 5.42% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.08% | 7.03% | -3.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.08% | 10.35% | -7.27% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.08% | 12.68% | -9.60% |
CSSD vs. PFF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSSD has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than PFF's 0.46% expense ratio.
Dividends
CSSD vs. PFF - Dividend Comparison
CSSD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.63%, less than PFF's 5.55% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 2.63% | 0.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PFF iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF | 5.55% | 6.30% | 6.32% | 6.63% | 6.01% | 4.45% | 4.79% | 5.31% | 6.32% | 5.59% | 5.85% | 5.76% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CSSD and PFF have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, PFF is cheaper at 0.46% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
PFF is cheaper with a 0.46% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for CSSD.
PFF has the higher dividend yield at 5.55%, compared with 2.63% for CSSD.
They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for CSSD and 0.46% for PFF.
Find the right allocation for CSSD and PFF
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