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

Performance

CWB vs. QQQ - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWB achieves a 23.48% return, which is significantly higher than QQQ's 21.30% return. Over the past 10 years, CWB has underperformed QQQ with an annualized return of 12.92%, while QQQ has yielded a comparatively higher 21.94% annualized return.


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%

QQQ

1D
-0.26%
1M
10.60%
YTD
21.30%
6M
19.66%
1Y
41.82%
3Y*
28.78%
5Y*
17.97%
10Y*
21.94%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CWB vs. QQQ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
QQQ
Invesco QQQ ETF
21.30%20.77%25.58%54.86%-32.58%27.42%48.62%38.96%-0.13%32.66%

Correlation

The correlation between CWB and QQQ is 0.75, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.75

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.73

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.80

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2009

0.79

The correlation between CWB and QQQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

CWB vs. QQQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CWB
QQQ

Utilities

89.4%
1.4%

Healthcare

8.8%
4.2%

Technology

6.0%
53.8%

Industrials

4.6%
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

0.6%
12.3%

Communication Services

0.1%
15.8%

Basic Materials

-

1.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

7.7%

Energy

-

0.6%

Financial Services

-

0.2%

Real Estate

-

0.1%

Utilities

CWB
89.4%
QQQ
1.4%

Healthcare

CWB
8.8%
QQQ
4.2%

Technology

CWB
6.0%
QQQ
53.8%

Industrials

CWB
4.6%
QQQ
2.8%

Consumer Cyclical

CWB
0.6%
QQQ
12.3%

Communication Services

CWB
0.1%
QQQ
15.8%

Basic Materials

CWB

-

QQQ
1.1%

Consumer Defensive

CWB

-

QQQ
7.7%

Energy

CWB

-

QQQ
0.6%

Financial Services

CWB

-

QQQ
0.2%

Real Estate

CWB

-

QQQ
0.1%

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. QQQ — 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

QQQ
QQQ Risk / Return Rank: 7373
Overall Rank
QQQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7979
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QQQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
QQQ Omega Ratio Rank: 7474
Omega Ratio Rank
QQQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
QQQ Martin Ratio Rank: 7171
Martin Ratio Rank
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. QQQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ). 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.


CWBQQQDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

2.74

2.64

+0.11

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

3.63

3.45

+0.18

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

1.45

+0.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

5.14

3.51

+1.63

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

18.58

13.49

+5.08

CWB vs. QQQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWB Sharpe Ratio is 2.74, which is comparable to the QQQ Sharpe Ratio of 2.64. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWB and QQQ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CWBQQQDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.74

2.64

+0.11

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

0.81

-0.22

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.90

0.99

-0.09

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.92

0.41

+0.51

Drawdowns

CWB vs. QQQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWB drawdown since its inception was -32.06%, smaller than the maximum QQQ drawdown of -82.97%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWB and QQQ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CWBQQQDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.06%

-82.97%

+50.91%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.52%

-11.96%

+4.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.92%

-22.77%

+10.85%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.41%

-35.12%

+6.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.06%

-35.12%

+3.06%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.16%

-0.26%

-0.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.17%

-32.79%

+26.62%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.08%

3.11%

-1.03%

Volatility

CWB vs. QQQ - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) has a higher volatility of 5.33% compared to Invesco QQQ ETF (QQQ) at 4.49%. This indicates that CWB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QQQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CWBQQQDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.33%

4.49%

+0.84%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.43%

12.10%

-0.67%

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%

22.38%

-9.43%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.47%

22.29%

-7.82%

CWB vs. QQQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWB has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than QQQ's 0.18% expense ratio.


Dividends

CWB vs. QQQ - Dividend Comparison

CWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.35%, more than QQQ's 0.38% yield.


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%
QQQ
Invesco QQQ ETF
0.38%0.45%0.56%0.62%0.80%0.43%0.55%0.74%0.91%0.84%1.06%0.99%

Frequently Asked Questions


CWB and QQQ have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CWB has higher volatility (5.33%) compared to QQQ (4.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWB dropped -32.06% vs QQQ's -82.97%.

On 10-year performance, QQQ leads with 21.94% vs 12.92% for CWB. On fees, QQQ is cheaper at 0.18% per year. On volatility, QQQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, QQQ has performed better with a 21.94% return vs 12.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

QQQ is cheaper with a 0.18% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for CWB.

CWB has the higher dividend yield at 1.35%, compared with 0.38% for QQQ.

CWB is categorized as Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds, while QQQ is Nasdaq-100. CWB tracks Bloomberg US Convertibles Liquid Bond, while QQQ tracks NASDAQ-100 Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CWB and 0.18% for QQQ.

CWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.74 vs 2.64), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CWB and QQQ

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