FALN vs. FLXR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FALN (iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF) and FLXR (TCW Flexible Income 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 FLXR is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by TCW. FALN is passively managed, while FLXR is actively managed. Over the past year, FALN returned 8.66% vs 5.89% for FLXR. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FALN charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for FLXR.

Performance

FALN vs. FLXR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) and TCW Flexible Income ETF (FLXR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FALN achieves a 1.56% return, which is significantly higher than FLXR's 1.09% return.

FALN

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

FLXR

• 1D: -0.18%
• 1M: 0.36%
• YTD: 1.09%
• 6M: 1.43%
• 1Y: 5.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FALN vs. FLXR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FALN iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF	1.56%	8.92%	4.83%
FLXR TCW Flexible Income ETF	1.09%	8.37%	4.77%

Correlation

The correlation between FALN and FLXR is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2024	0.52

The correlation between FALN and FLXR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.52 to 0.60 - a consistent structural relationship.

FALN vs. FLXR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FALN	FLXR
Real Estate	100.0%	37.6%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	62.4%
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

FALN vs. FLXR — Risk / Return Rank

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

FALN

FALN Risk / Return Rank: 54
FALN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
FALN Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
FALN Omega Ratio Rank: 60
FALN Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
FALN Martin Ratio Rank: 53

FLXR

FLXR Risk / Return Rank: 82
FLXR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
FLXR Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
FLXR Omega Ratio Rank: 83
FLXR Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
FLXR Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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. FLXR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) and TCW Flexible Income ETF (FLXR). 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.

	FALN	FLXR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.91	2.61	-0.70
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.78	3.94	-1.17
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.51	-0.14
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.20	4.04	-1.84
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	9.17	17.36	-8.19
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. FLXR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FALN Sharpe Ratio is 1.91, which is comparable to the FLXR Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FALN and FLXR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	FALN	FLXR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.91	2.61	-0.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.74	2.65	-1.91

Drawdowns

FALN vs. FLXR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FALN drawdown since its inception was -29.22%, which is greater than FLXR's maximum drawdown of -1.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FALN and FLXR.

Drawdown Indicators

	FALN	FLXR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.22%	-1.94%	-27.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.96%	-1.46%	-2.50%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-5.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-18.78%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.26%	-0.23%	-0.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.32%	-0.36%	-2.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.95%	0.34%	+0.61%

Volatility

FALN vs. FLXR - Volatility Comparison

iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) has a higher volatility of 1.38% compared to TCW Flexible Income ETF (FLXR) at 0.76%. This indicates that FALN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLXR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FALN	FLXR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.38%	0.76%	+0.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.64%	1.65%	+1.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.54%	2.26%	+2.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.31%	2.79%	+4.52%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	8.95%	2.79%	+6.16%

FALN vs. FLXR - Expense Ratio Comparison

FALN has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than FLXR's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

FALN vs. FLXR - Dividend Comparison

FALN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.46%, more than FLXR's 5.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
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%
FLXR TCW Flexible Income ETF	5.82%	5.66%	3.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FALN and FLXR in my portfolio?

FALN and FLXR have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FALN or FLXR?

FALN has higher volatility (1.38%) compared to FLXR (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FALN dropped -29.22% vs FLXR's -1.94%.

Which ETF is better, FALN or FLXR?

On 1-year performance, FALN leads with 8.66% vs 5.89% for FLXR. On fees, FALN is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FLXR has been the lower-risk option at 0.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FALN or FLXR?

Over the 1-year period, FALN has performed better with a 8.66% return vs 5.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FALN or FLXR?

FALN is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for FLXR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FALN or FLXR?

FALN has the higher dividend yield at 6.46%, compared with 5.82% for FLXR.

What is the main difference between FALN and FLXR?

FALN is categorized as High Yield Bonds, while FLXR is Multisector Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FALN and 0.40% for FLXR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLXR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.61 vs 1.91), 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.