CWB vs. FCVT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CWB (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF) and FCVT (First Trust SSI Strategic Convertible Securities ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. CWB is passively managed, while FCVT is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, CWB returned 12.92%/yr vs 12.36%/yr for FCVT. A 0.79 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CWB charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for FCVT.

Performance

CWB vs. FCVT - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWB achieves a 23.48% return, which is significantly lower than FCVT's 25.61% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with CWB having a 12.92% annualized return and FCVT not far behind at 12.36%.

CWB

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: 7.03%
• YTD: 23.48%
• 6M: 22.61%
• 1Y: 38.47%
• 3Y*: 19.67%
• 5Y*: 7.54%
• 10Y*: 12.92%

FCVT

• 1D: -1.20%
• 1M: 7.08%
• YTD: 25.61%
• 6M: 25.00%
• 1Y: 47.07%
• 3Y*: 21.35%
• 5Y*: 7.58%
• 10Y*: 12.36%

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

CWB vs. FCVT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	23.48%	16.61%	10.06%	14.49%	-20.81%	2.18%	53.39%	22.39%	-2.00%	15.69%
FCVT First Trust SSI Strategic Convertible Securities ETF	25.61%	19.60%	11.92%	7.12%	-20.88%	4.23%	51.02%	22.30%	-2.28%	12.66%

Correlation

The correlation between CWB and FCVT is 0.95, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.83
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2015	0.79

The correlation between CWB and FCVT shifts across timeframes, from 0.79 (all time) to 0.95 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

CWB vs. FCVT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CWB	FCVT
Utilities	89.4%	1.3%
Healthcare	8.8%	0.7%
Technology	6.0%	-
Industrials	4.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.6%	0.7%
Communication Services	0.1%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	0.7%
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

CWB vs. FCVT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWB

CWB Risk / Return Rank: 83
CWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
CWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
CWB Omega Ratio Rank: 80
CWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
CWB Martin Ratio Rank: 86

FCVT

FCVT Risk / Return Rank: 87
FCVT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FCVT Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
FCVT Omega Ratio Rank: 82
FCVT Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
FCVT Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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. FCVT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and First Trust SSI Strategic Convertible Securities ETF (FCVT). 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.

	CWB	FCVT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.74	2.97	-0.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.63	3.76	-0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.49	1.50	-0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.14	5.58	-0.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.58	20.90	-2.32
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CWB vs. FCVT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the FCVT Sharpe Ratio of 2.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWB and FCVT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CWB	FCVT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.74	2.97	-0.22
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59	0.54	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.90	0.83	+0.06
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.92	0.68	+0.24

Drawdowns

CWB vs. FCVT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWB drawdown since its inception was -32.06%, roughly equal to the maximum FCVT drawdown of -31.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWB and FCVT.

Drawdown Indicators

	CWB	FCVT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.06%	-31.79%	-0.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.52%	-8.47%	+0.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.92%	-15.06%	+3.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.41%	-30.43%	+2.02%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.06%	-31.79%	-0.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.16%	-1.20%	+0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.17%	-10.36%	+4.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.08%	2.26%	-0.18%

Volatility

CWB vs. FCVT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) is 5.33%, while First Trust SSI Strategic Convertible Securities ETF (FCVT) has a volatility of 6.07%. This indicates that CWB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCVT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CWB	FCVT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.33%	6.07%	-0.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.43%	12.99%	-1.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.10%	15.94%	-1.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.95%	14.09%	-1.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.47%	14.85%	-0.38%

CWB vs. FCVT - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWB has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than FCVT's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWB vs. FCVT - Dividend Comparison

CWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than FCVT's 1.19% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	1.35%	1.69%	1.85%	1.97%	2.21%	1.97%	2.34%	3.03%	6.17%	4.25%	4.60%	7.52%
FCVT First Trust SSI Strategic Convertible Securities ETF	1.19%	1.98%	1.30%	1.76%	3.71%	23.07%	1.72%	1.60%	1.85%	2.18%	1.88%	0.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CWB and FCVT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, CWB and FCVT move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CWB or FCVT?

FCVT has higher volatility (6.07%) compared to CWB (5.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWB dropped -32.06% vs FCVT's -31.79%.

Which ETF is better, CWB or FCVT?

On 10-year performance, CWB leads with 12.92% vs 12.36% for FCVT. On fees, CWB is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, CWB has been the lower-risk option at 5.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CWB or FCVT?

Over the 10-year period, CWB has performed better with a 12.92% return vs 12.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CWB or FCVT?

CWB is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FCVT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CWB or FCVT?

CWB has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 1.19% for FCVT.

What is the main difference between CWB and FCVT?

They also come from different issuers: State Street and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CWB and 0.95% for FCVT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCVT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.97 vs 2.74), 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.