CSSD vs. PFFA
CSSD (Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF) and PFFA (Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSSD charges 0.49%/yr vs 1.47%/yr for PFFA.
Performance
CSSD vs. PFFA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CSSD achieves a 2.72% return, which is significantly higher than PFFA's 2.26% return.
CSSD
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.68%
- YTD
- 2.72%
- 6M
- 2.91%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PFFA
- 1D
- -0.28%
- 1M
- -0.23%
- YTD
- 2.26%
- 6M
- 1.93%
- 1Y
- 11.54%
- 3Y*
- 14.10%
- 5Y*
- 6.09%
- 10Y*
- —
CSSD vs. PFFA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 2.72% | 0.49% |
PFFA Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF | 2.26% | 0.41% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSSD and PFFA 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. PFFA — Risk / Return Rank
CSSD
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
PFFA
CSSD vs. PFFA - 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 Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF (PFFA). 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 | PFFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.30 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.79 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 5.90 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CSSD vs. PFFA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSSD drawdown since its inception was -2.32%, smaller than the maximum PFFA drawdown of -70.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSSD and PFFA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSSD | PFFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.32% | -70.52% | +68.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -6.49% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -12.15% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -22.70% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.20% | -2.28% | +2.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.29% | -6.62% | +6.33% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.96% | — |
Volatility
CSSD vs. PFFA - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CSSD | PFFA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 2.13% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 5.91% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.08% | 7.16% | -4.08% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 3.08% | 11.54% | -8.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 3.08% | 31.74% | -28.66% |
CSSD vs. PFFA - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSSD has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than PFFA's 1.47% expense ratio.
Dividends
CSSD vs. PFFA - Dividend Comparison
CSSD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.63%, less than PFFA's 9.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
PFFA Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF | 9.79% | 9.47% | 9.18% | 9.56% | 10.75% | 7.64% | 8.54% | 10.02% | 5.15% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CSSD and PFFA 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, CSSD is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CSSD is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 1.47% for PFFA.
PFFA has the higher dividend yield at 9.79%, compared with 2.63% for CSSD.
They also come from different issuers: Cohen & Steers and Virtus Investment Partners. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for CSSD and 1.47% for PFFA.
Find the right allocation for CSSD and PFFA
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