CWB vs. BGT

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

CWB (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF) and BGT (BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust) are both funds - CWB is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Convertibles Liquid Bond, while BGT is a Bank Loan fund managed by BlackRock. Over the past 10 years, CWB returned 13.20%/yr vs 6.41%/yr for BGT. At a 0.28 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CWB charges 0.40%/yr vs 1.74%/yr for BGT.

Performance

CWB vs. BGT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWB achieves a 24.57% return, which is significantly higher than BGT's 0.26% return. Over the past 10 years, CWB has outperformed BGT with an annualized return of 13.20%, while BGT has yielded a comparatively lower 6.41% annualized return.

CWB

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: 4.67%
• YTD: 24.57%
• 6M: 22.13%
• 1Y: 39.20%
• 3Y*: 19.32%
• 5Y*: 7.23%
• 10Y*: 13.20%

BGT

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -0.73%
• YTD: 0.26%
• 6M: 0.35%
• 1Y: -1.61%
• 3Y*: 10.24%
• 5Y*: 6.54%
• 10Y*: 6.41%

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

CWB vs. BGT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	24.57%	16.61%	10.06%	14.49%	-20.81%	2.18%	53.39%	22.39%	-2.00%	15.69%
BGT BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust	0.26%	-0.84%	16.12%	26.29%	-16.57%	25.89%	-0.81%	18.97%	-11.95%	3.91%

Correlation

The correlation between CWB and BGT is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.27
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.24
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.31
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.29
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2009	0.28

Return for Risk

CWB vs. BGT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWB

CWB Risk / Return Rank: 84
CWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 84
CWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
CWB Omega Ratio Rank: 81
CWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
CWB Martin Ratio Rank: 87

BGT

BGT Risk / Return Rank: 2
BGT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
BGT Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
BGT Omega Ratio Rank: 2
BGT Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
BGT Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

CWB vs. BGT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT). 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.

	CWB	BGT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.60	-0.16	+2.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.37	-0.16	+3.53
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	0.98	+0.48
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.24	-0.15	+5.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.71	-0.31	+18.03

CWB vs. BGT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.60, which is higher than the BGT Sharpe Ratio of -0.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWB and BGT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CWB vs. BGT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWB drawdown since its inception was -32.06%, smaller than the maximum BGT drawdown of -58.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWB and BGT.

Drawdown Indicators

	CWB	BGT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.06%	-58.06%	+26.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.52%	-11.06%	+3.54%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.92%	-15.91%	+3.99%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.41%	-23.19%	-5.22%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.06%	-41.90%	+9.84%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.29%	-5.85%	+5.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.16%	-8.11%	+1.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.22%	5.14%	-2.92%

Volatility

CWB vs. BGT - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) has a higher volatility of 6.68% compared to BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT) at 1.46%. This indicates that CWB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BGT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CWB	BGT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.68%	1.46%	+5.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.58%	7.02%	+5.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.18%	9.95%	+5.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.18%	13.56%	-0.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.58%	15.34%	-0.76%

CWB vs. BGT - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWB has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than BGT's 1.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWB vs. BGT - Dividend Comparison

CWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.34%, less than BGT's 13.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BGT BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust	13.57%	12.74%	11.22%	10.36%	6.87%	5.55%	7.58%	6.33%	6.64%	5.03%	5.03%	6.04%
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	1.34%	1.69%	1.85%	1.97%	2.21%	1.97%	2.34%	3.03%	6.17%	4.25%	4.60%	7.52%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CWB and BGT in my portfolio?

CWB and BGT have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CWB or BGT?

CWB has higher volatility (6.68%) compared to BGT (1.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWB dropped -32.06% vs BGT's -58.06%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.60 vs -0.16), 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.