PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CWB vs. QPFF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CWB vs. QPFF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and American Century Quality Preferred ETF (QPFF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


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%

QPFF

1D
0.00%
1M
0.00%
YTD
6M
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CWB vs. QPFF - Yearly Performance Comparison


CWB vs. QPFF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CWB
QPFF

Utilities

89.4%
5.5%

Healthcare

8.8%

-

Technology

6.0%

-

Industrials

4.6%
1.2%

Consumer Cyclical

0.6%
2.1%

Communication Services

0.1%
3.6%

Basic Materials

-

0.3%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

51.6%

Real Estate

-

4.1%

Utilities

CWB
89.4%
QPFF
5.5%

Healthcare

CWB
8.8%
QPFF

-

Technology

CWB
6.0%
QPFF

-

Industrials

CWB
4.6%
QPFF
1.2%

Consumer Cyclical

CWB
0.6%
QPFF
2.1%

Communication Services

CWB
0.1%
QPFF
3.6%

Basic Materials

CWB

-

QPFF
0.3%

Consumer Defensive

CWB

-

QPFF

-

Energy

CWB

-

QPFF

-

Financial Services

CWB

-

QPFF
51.6%

Real Estate

CWB

-

QPFF
4.1%

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. QPFF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWB
CWB Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
CWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8383
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8080
Sortino Ratio Rank
CWB Omega Ratio Rank: 8080
Omega Ratio Rank
CWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
CWB Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
Martin Ratio Rank

QPFF
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. QPFF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and American Century Quality Preferred ETF (QPFF). 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.


CWBQPFFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

18.58

CWB vs. QPFF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CWBQPFFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.90

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.92

Drawdowns

CWB vs. QPFF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWB drawdown since its inception was -32.06%, which is greater than QPFF's maximum drawdown of 0.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWB and QPFF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CWBQPFFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.06%

0.00%

-32.06%

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 Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.16%

0.00%

-1.16%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.17%

0.00%

-6.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.08%

Volatility

CWB vs. QPFF - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CWBQPFFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.43%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.10%

0.00%

+14.10%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.95%

0.00%

+12.95%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.47%

0.00%

+14.47%

CWB vs. QPFF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWB has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than QPFF's 0.33% expense ratio.


Dividends

CWB vs. QPFF - Dividend Comparison

CWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, while QPFF has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
QPFF
American Century Quality Preferred ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


On fees, QPFF is cheaper at 0.33% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

QPFF is cheaper with a 0.33% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for CWB.

CWB has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.00% for QPFF.

They also come from different issuers: State Street and American Century. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CWB and 0.33% for QPFF.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CWB and QPFF

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