CWB vs. BGT
CWB (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF) and BGT (BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust) are both funds - CWB is a 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 11.70%/yr vs 6.51%/yr for BGT. Their 0.28 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CWB charges 0.40%/yr vs 1.74%/yr for BGT.
Performance
CWB vs. BGT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CWB achieves a 15.00% return, which is significantly higher than BGT's 3.20% return. Over the past 10 years, CWB has outperformed BGT with an annualized return of 11.70%, while BGT has yielded a comparatively lower 6.51% annualized return.
CWB
- 1D
- 0.35%
- 1M
- -2.42%
- 6M
- 9.82%
- YTD
- 15.00%
- 1Y
- 23.27%
- 3Y*
- 14.55%
- 5Y*
- 5.59%
- 10Y*
- 11.70%
- ALL TIME*
- 11.55%
BGT
- 1D
- 0.74%
- 1M
- 2.93%
- 6M
- 1.06%
- YTD
- 3.20%
- 1Y
- -3.09%
- 3Y*
- 8.77%
- 5Y*
- 6.83%
- 10Y*
- 6.51%
- ALL TIME*
- 5.40%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1.59M | $1.30M | $1.18M | |
| $56.06M | $68.05M | $91.74M |
CWB vs. BGT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 15.00% | 16.61% | 10.06% | 14.49% | -20.81% | 2.18% | 53.39% | 22.39% | -2.00% | 15.69% |
BGT BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust | 3.20% | -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 0.29, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.25 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.31 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.29 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 16, 2009 | 0.28 |
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
CWB vs. BGT — Risk / Return Rank
CWB
BGT
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 ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 0.96 | +0.27 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.98 | -0.25 | +2.23 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.11 | -0.52 | +7.62 |
Loading charts...
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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CWB | BGT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.06% | -58.06% | +26.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.08% | -11.06% | -0.02% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.95% | -3.09% | -4.86% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.16% | -8.10% | +1.94% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.08% | 5.41% | -2.33% |
Volatility
CWB vs. BGT - Volatility Comparison
SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) has a higher volatility of 5.90% compared to BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust (BGT) at 3.08%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CWB | BGT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.90% | 3.08% | +2.82% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.92% | 7.43% | +6.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.61% | 9.95% | +6.66% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.46% | 13.60% | -0.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.69% | 15.35% | -0.66% |
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 1.45%, less than BGT's 13.33% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BGT BlackRock Floating Rate Income Trust | 13.33% | 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 | 1.33% | 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
CWB and BGT have a correlation of 0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CWB has higher volatility (5.90%) compared to BGT (3.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWB dropped -32.06% vs BGT's -58.06%.
CWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.32 vs -0.28), 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.
Find the right allocation for CWB and BGT
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