ESBG vs. MINT
ESBG (First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF) and MINT (PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ESBG is a Tactical Allocation fund actively managed by First Trust, while MINT is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by PIMCO. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. ESBG charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for MINT.
Performance
ESBG vs. MINT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ESBG achieves a -2.05% return, which is significantly lower than MINT's 2.05% return.
ESBG
- 1D
- -1.81%
- 1M
- -7.19%
- YTD
- -2.05%
- 6M
- -5.44%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MINT
- 1D
- 0.01%
- 1M
- 0.34%
- YTD
- 2.05%
- 6M
- 2.16%
- 1Y
- 4.66%
- 3Y*
- 5.35%
- 5Y*
- 3.52%
- 10Y*
- 2.72%
ESBG vs. MINT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF | -2.05% | 5.67% |
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF | 2.05% | 0.54% |
Correlation
The correlation between ESBG and MINT is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 19, 2025 | -0.05 |
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
ESBG vs. MINT — Risk / Return Rank
ESBG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
MINT
ESBG vs. MINT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF (ESBG) and PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF (MINT). 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.
| ESBG | MINT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 18.98 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 94.18 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 866.10 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ESBG vs. MINT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ESBG drawdown since its inception was -18.84%, which is greater than MINT's maximum drawdown of -4.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ESBG and MINT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ESBG | MINT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.84% | -4.62% | -14.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.05% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.16% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -2.42% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -4.62% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.94% | -0.02% | -16.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.94% | -0.17% | -6.77% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.01% | — |
Volatility
ESBG vs. MINT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ESBG | MINT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.11% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.21% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.28% | 0.28% | +26.00% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 26.28% | 0.58% | +25.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 26.28% | 0.95% | +25.33% |
ESBG vs. MINT - Expense Ratio Comparison
ESBG has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than MINT's 0.36% expense ratio.
Dividends
ESBG vs. MINT - Dividend Comparison
ESBG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, less than MINT's 4.28% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ESBG First Trust Enhanced Stocks, Bonds & Gold ETF | 0.62% | 0.24% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MINT PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF | 4.28% | 4.63% | 5.22% | 4.91% | 1.90% | 0.44% | 1.15% | 2.65% | 2.32% | 1.61% | 1.35% | 0.88% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ESBG and MINT have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, MINT is cheaper at 0.36% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
MINT is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for ESBG.
MINT has the higher dividend yield at 4.28%, compared with 0.62% for ESBG.
ESBG is categorized as Tactical Allocation, while MINT is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for ESBG and 0.36% for MINT.
Find the right allocation for ESBG and MINT
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