PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo

Documentation

Upgrade your plan
FALN vs. CLIX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

FALN vs. CLIX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FALN (iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF) and CLIX (ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FALN is a High Yield Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US High Yield Fallen Angel 3% Capped Index, while CLIX is a Long-Short fund tracking the ProShares Long Online/Short Stores Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FALN returned 3.78%/yr vs -6.40%/yr for CLIX. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FALN charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for CLIX.

Performance

FALN vs. CLIX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) and ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF (CLIX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FALN achieves a 1.56% return, which is significantly higher than CLIX's -6.21% return.

FALN

1D
-0.22%
1M
0.68%
YTD
1.56%
6M
1.36%
1Y
8.66%
3Y*
9.18%
5Y*
3.78%
10Y*
—

CLIX

1D
-2.35%
1M
-6.73%
YTD
-6.21%
6M
-6.37%
1Y
12.94%
3Y*
18.92%
5Y*
-6.40%
10Y*
—
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FALN vs. CLIX - Yearly Performance Comparison

2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FALN
iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF		1.56%8.92%7.68%13.47%-13.79%5.40%14.85%17.42%-4.97%0.81%
CLIX
ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF		-6.21%32.81%20.73%28.97%-46.73%-39.96%90.91%17.32%6.34%-2.09%

Correlation

The correlation between FALN and CLIX is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

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

0.36

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

0.41

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

0.47

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2017

0.43

The correlation between FALN and CLIX shifts across timeframes, from 0.36 (1 year) to 0.47 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FALN vs. CLIX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors
FALN
CLIX

Real Estate

100.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

94.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.6%

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

-

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Technology

-

3.6%

Utilities

-

-

Real Estate

FALN
100.0%
CLIX

-

Basic Materials

FALN

-

CLIX

-

Communication Services

FALN

-

CLIX

-

Consumer Cyclical

FALN

-

CLIX
94.8%

Consumer Defensive

FALN

-

CLIX
1.6%

Energy

FALN

-

CLIX

-

Financial Services

FALN

-

CLIX

-

Healthcare

FALN

-

CLIX

-

Industrials

FALN

-

CLIX

-

Technology

FALN

-

CLIX
3.6%

Utilities

FALN

-

CLIX

-

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF

ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF

Often compared with FALN:
FALN vs. ANGLFALN vs. HYGFALN vs. SCYBFALN vs. IMTBFALN vs. BKLNFALN vs. FLOTFALN vs. DBA
Often compared with CLIX:
CLIX vs. GREKCLIX vs. FXGCLIX vs. ROBTCLIX vs. ARKGCLIX vs. FDISCLIX vs. SPYCLIX vs. QQQ

Return for Risk

FALN vs. CLIX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.
FALN
FALN Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
FALN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FALN Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
FALN Omega Ratio Rank: 6060
Omega Ratio Rank
FALN Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
FALN Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank
CLIX
CLIX Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
CLIX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1919
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLIX Sortino Ratio Rank: 1818
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLIX Omega Ratio Rank: 1818
Omega Ratio Rank
CLIX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1717
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLIX Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
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.

FALN vs. CLIX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) and ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF (CLIX). 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.

FALNCLIXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility
1.91
0.62

+1.29

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk
2.78
0.97

+1.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.12

+0.25

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.20

0.66

+1.53

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.17

1.81

+7.36

Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FALN vs. CLIX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FALN Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is higher than the CLIX Sharpe Ratio of 0.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FALN and CLIX, 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

FALNCLIXDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.91

0.62

+1.29

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.52

-0.24

+0.76

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.74

0.17

+0.57

Drawdowns

FALN vs. CLIX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FALN drawdown since its inception was -29.22%, smaller than the maximum CLIX drawdown of -73.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FALN and CLIX.

Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators

FALNCLIXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.22%

-73.21%

+43.99%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.96%

-19.57%

+15.61%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.92%

-21.18%

+15.26%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.78%

-68.22%

+49.44%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.26%

-44.59%

+44.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.32%

-34.70%

+31.38%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.95%

7.15%

-6.20%

Volatility

FALN vs. CLIX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) is 1.38%, while ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF (CLIX) has a volatility of 5.08%. This indicates that FALN experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLIX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Loading charts...

Volatility by Period

FALNCLIXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.38%

5.08%

-3.70%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

3.64%

15.59%

-11.95%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.54%

20.89%

-16.35%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

7.31%

26.94%

-19.63%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

8.95%

25.92%

-16.97%

FALN vs. CLIX - Expense Ratio Comparison

FALN has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CLIX's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

FALN vs. CLIX - Dividend Comparison

FALN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.46%, more than CLIX's 0.57% yield.

PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
CLIX
ProShares Long Online/Short Stores ETF		0.57%0.46%0.46%0.00%0.00%0.00%1.33%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FALN
iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF		6.46%6.31%6.24%5.37%5.08%3.40%5.14%5.35%5.97%6.98%3.55%

Frequently Asked Questions

FALN and CLIX have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CLIX has higher volatility (5.08%) compared to FALN (1.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FALN dropped -29.22% vs CLIX's -73.21%.

On 5-year performance, FALN leads with 3.78% vs -6.40% for CLIX. On fees, FALN is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FALN has been the lower-risk option at 1.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FALN has performed better with a 3.78% return vs -6.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FALN is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for CLIX.

FALN has the higher dividend yield at 6.46%, compared with 0.57% for CLIX.

FALN is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while CLIX is Long-Short. FALN tracks Bloomberg US High Yield Fallen Angel 3% Capped Index, while CLIX tracks ProShares Long Online/Short Stores Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FALN and 0.65% for CLIX.

FALN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.91 vs 0.62), 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 FALN and CLIX

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