CWB vs. ANGL
Compare and contrast key facts about SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF (ANGL).
CWB and ANGL are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CWB is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the Bloomberg US Convertibles Liquid Bond. It was launched on Apr 14, 2009. ANGL is a passively managed fund by VanEck that tracks the performance of the BofA Merrill Lynch US Fallen Angel High Yield Index. It was launched on Apr 10, 2012. Both CWB and ANGL are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CWB or ANGL.
Key characteristics
| CWB | ANGL | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 10.92% | 6.76% |
| 1Y Return | 22.51% | 14.05% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | -1.94% | 0.75% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 10.61% | 5.14% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 9.18% | 6.10% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.61 | 2.61 |
| Sortino Ratio | 3.71 | 4.04 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.47 | 1.51 |
| Calmar Ratio | 0.87 | 1.29 |
| Martin Ratio | 14.19 | 18.06 |
| Ulcer Index | 1.52% | 0.74% |
| Daily Std Dev | 8.25% | 5.10% |
| Max Drawdown | -32.06% | -35.07% |
| Current Drawdown | -7.77% | 0.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between CWB and ANGL is 0.50, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
CWB vs. ANGL - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CWB achieves a 10.92% return, which is significantly higher than ANGL's 6.76% return. Over the past 10 years, CWB has outperformed ANGL with an annualized return of 9.18%, while ANGL has yielded a comparatively lower 6.10% annualized return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CWB vs. ANGL - Expense Ratio Comparison
CWB has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than ANGL's 0.35% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CWB vs. ANGL - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF (ANGL). 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.
Dividends
CWB vs. ANGL - Dividend Comparison
CWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.73%, less than ANGL's 6.05% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 1.73% | 1.97% | 2.21% | 1.97% | 2.34% | 3.03% | 6.17% | 4.25% | 4.60% | 7.52% | 7.36% | 3.66% |
ANGL VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF | 6.05% | 5.27% | 4.72% | 3.90% | 4.67% | 5.20% | 6.00% | 5.25% | 5.79% | 5.82% | 6.80% | 6.10% |
Drawdowns
CWB vs. ANGL - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CWB drawdown since its inception was -32.06%, smaller than the maximum ANGL drawdown of -35.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWB and ANGL. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CWB vs. ANGL - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) has a higher volatility of 2.22% compared to VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF (ANGL) at 1.27%. This indicates that CWB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ANGL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.