CWB vs. RSBY

Last updated Jul 12, 2026

CWB (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF) and RSBY (Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CWB is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Convertibles Liquid Bond, while RSBY is a Multistrategy fund actively managed by Return Stacked. CWB is passively managed, while RSBY is actively managed. Over the past year, CWB returned 27.88% vs 17.35% for RSBY. At a correlation of -0.20, they often move in opposite directions. CWB charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.98%/yr for RSBY.

Performance

CWB vs. RSBY - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with CWB having a 18.82% return and RSBY slightly lower at 18.52%.

CWB

• 1D: -0.36%
• 1M: -1.45%
• 6M: 14.83%
• YTD: 18.82%
• 1Y: 27.88%
• 3Y*: 16.36%
• 5Y*: 6.13%
• 10Y*: 12.15%

RSBY

• 1D: -0.60%
• 1M: -0.71%
• 6M: 17.92%
• YTD: 18.52%
• 1Y: 17.35%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CWB vs. RSBY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	18.82%	16.61%	7.20%
RSBY Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF	18.52%	-12.98%	-7.79%

Correlation

The correlation between CWB and RSBY is -0.24, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.24
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 21, 2024	-0.20

Return for Risk

CWB vs. RSBY — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWB

CWB Risk / Return Rank: 71
CWB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
CWB Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
CWB Omega Ratio Rank: 64
CWB Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
CWB Martin Ratio Rank: 76

RSBY

RSBY Risk / Return Rank: 51
RSBY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
RSBY Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
RSBY Omega Ratio Rank: 51
RSBY Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
RSBY Martin Ratio Rank: 40

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. RSBY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) and Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY). 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	RSBY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	1.50	+0.25
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.35	2.18	+0.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.26	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.68	2.15	+1.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.36	5.04	+6.33

CWB vs. RSBY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWB Sharpe Ratio is 1.75, which is comparable to the RSBY Sharpe Ratio of 1.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWB and RSBY, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CWB vs. RSBY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWB drawdown since its inception was -32.06%, which is greater than RSBY's maximum drawdown of -23.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWB and RSBY.

Drawdown Indicators

	CWB	RSBY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.06%	-23.32%	-8.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.52%	-7.95%	+0.43%
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	-4.89%	-6.45%	+1.56%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.15%	-13.35%	+7.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.43%	3.39%	-0.96%

Volatility

CWB vs. RSBY - Volatility Comparison

SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) has a higher volatility of 6.21% compared to Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF (RSBY) at 3.15%. This indicates that CWB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RSBY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CWB	RSBY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.21%	3.15%	+3.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.09%	8.37%	+4.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.79%	11.41%	+4.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.31%	13.37%	-0.06%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	14.60%	13.37%	+1.23%

CWB vs. RSBY - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWB has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than RSBY's 0.98% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWB vs. RSBY - Dividend Comparison

CWB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.41%, less than RSBY's 1.75% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF	1.41%	1.69%	1.85%	1.97%	2.21%	1.97%	2.34%	3.03%	6.17%	4.25%	4.60%	7.52%
RSBY Return Stacked Bonds & Futures Yield ETF	1.75%	2.07%	2.29%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CWB and RSBY in my portfolio?

CWB and RSBY have a correlation of -0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CWB or RSBY?

CWB has higher volatility (6.21%) compared to RSBY (3.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWB dropped -32.06% vs RSBY's -23.32%.

Which ETF is better, CWB or RSBY?

On 1-year performance, CWB leads with 27.88% vs 17.35% for RSBY. On fees, CWB is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, RSBY has been the lower-risk option at 3.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CWB or RSBY?

Over the 1-year period, CWB has performed better with a 27.88% return vs 17.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CWB or RSBY?

CWB is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for RSBY.

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

RSBY has the higher dividend yield at 1.75%, compared with 1.41% for CWB.

What is the main difference between CWB and RSBY?

CWB is categorized as Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds, while RSBY is Multistrategy. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Return Stacked. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for CWB and 0.98% for RSBY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.75 vs 1.50), 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.