CWB vs. CSSD
CWB (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF) and CSSD (Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. CWB is passively managed, while CSSD is actively managed. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CWB charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for CSSD.
Performance
CWB vs. CSSD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CWB achieves a 22.11% return, which is significantly higher than CSSD's 2.72% return.
CWB
- 1D
- -1.97%
- 1M
- 2.60%
- YTD
- 22.11%
- 6M
- 20.22%
- 1Y
- 36.00%
- 3Y*
- 18.53%
- 5Y*
- 6.58%
- 10Y*
- 12.98%
CSSD
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.68%
- YTD
- 2.72%
- 6M
- 2.91%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CWB vs. CSSD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 22.11% | -1.58% |
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 2.72% | 0.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between CWB and CSSD is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2025 | 0.40 |
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. CSSD — Risk / Return Rank
CWB
CSSD
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
CWB vs. CSSD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF (CSSD). 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 | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.81 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 16.23 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CWB vs. CSSD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CWB drawdown since its inception was -32.06%, which is greater than CSSD's maximum drawdown of -2.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWB and CSSD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CWB | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.06% | -2.32% | -29.74% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.52% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.92% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.41% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -32.06% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.26% | -0.20% | -2.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.16% | -0.29% | -5.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.22% | — | — |
Volatility
CWB vs. CSSD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CWB | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.78% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.74% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.29% | 3.08% | +12.21% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.21% | 3.08% | +10.13% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.57% | 3.08% | +11.49% |
CWB vs. CSSD - Expense Ratio Comparison
CWB has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than CSSD's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
CWB vs. CSSD - Dividend Comparison
CWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.37%, less than CSSD's 2.63% 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% |
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 1.37% | 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 CSSD have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CWB is cheaper at 0.40% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CWB is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for CSSD.
CSSD has the higher dividend yield at 2.63%, compared with 1.37% for CWB.
They also come from different issuers: State Street and Cohen & Steers. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CWB and 0.49% for CSSD.
Find the right allocation for CWB and CSSD
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