PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FOF vs. FALN
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FOF vs. FALN - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Cohen & Steers Closed-End Opportunity Fund (FOF) and iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FOF achieves a 6.44% return, which is significantly higher than FALN's 2.24% return. Over the past 10 years, FOF has outperformed FALN with an annualized return of 10.86%, while FALN has yielded a comparatively lower 6.60% annualized return.


FOF

1D
-0.29%
1M
-1.83%
YTD
6.44%
6M
6.60%
1Y
18.91%
3Y*
17.31%
5Y*
7.82%
10Y*
10.86%

FALN

1D
-0.11%
1M
1.07%
YTD
2.24%
6M
2.46%
1Y
7.88%
3Y*
9.39%
5Y*
3.76%
10Y*
6.60%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FOF vs. FALN - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FOF
Cohen & Steers Closed-End Opportunity Fund
6.44%13.01%23.65%17.90%-22.69%28.24%1.52%31.37%-9.43%23.41%
FALN
iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF
2.24%8.92%7.68%13.47%-13.79%5.40%14.85%17.42%-4.97%8.70%

Correlation

The correlation between FOF and FALN is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.42

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

0.46

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

0.45

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

0.43

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 17, 2016

0.43

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

FOF vs. FALN — Risk / Return Rank

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

FOF
FOF Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
FOF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2727
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FOF Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
FOF Omega Ratio Rank: 2828
Omega Ratio Rank
FOF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
FOF Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank

FALN
FALN Risk / Return Rank: 5050
Overall Rank
FALN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FALN Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FALN Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
FALN Calmar Ratio Rank: 4141
Calmar Ratio Rank
FALN Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
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.

FOF vs. FALN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Cohen & Steers Closed-End Opportunity Fund (FOF) and iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN). 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.


FOFFALNDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.34

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.55

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.33

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.26

2.00

-0.74

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.07

8.32

-4.25

FOF vs. FALN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FOF Sharpe Ratio is 1.38, which is comparable to the FALN Sharpe Ratio of 1.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FOF and FALN, 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...

Drawdowns

FOF vs. FALN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FOF drawdown since its inception was -59.38%, which is greater than FALN's maximum drawdown of -29.22%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FOF and FALN.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FOFFALNDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.38%

-29.22%

-30.16%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.07%

-3.96%

-11.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-18.58%

-5.92%

-12.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.96%

-18.78%

-11.18%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-49.74%

-29.22%

-20.52%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-7.06%

-0.11%

-6.95%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.34%

-3.31%

-6.03%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.65%

0.95%

+3.70%

Volatility

FOF vs. FALN - Volatility Comparison

Cohen & Steers Closed-End Opportunity Fund (FOF) has a higher volatility of 3.83% compared to iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF (FALN) at 1.18%. This indicates that FOF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FALN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FOFFALNDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.83%

1.18%

+2.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.30%

3.73%

+8.57%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.76%

4.60%

+9.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.04%

7.33%

+10.71%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

20.34%

8.94%

+11.40%

FOF vs. FALN - Expense Ratio Comparison

FOF has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than FALN's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

FOF vs. FALN - Dividend Comparison

FOF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.72%, more than FALN's 6.42% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FALN
iShares Fallen Angels USD Bond ETF
6.42%6.31%6.24%5.37%5.08%3.40%5.14%5.35%5.97%6.98%3.55%0.00%
FOF
Cohen & Steers Closed-End Opportunity Fund
7.72%7.91%8.22%9.32%9.99%7.06%8.41%7.78%9.41%7.84%8.90%9.49%

Frequently Asked Questions


FOF and FALN have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FOF has higher volatility (3.83%) compared to FALN (1.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FOF dropped -59.38% vs FALN's -29.22%.

FALN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.72 vs 1.38), 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 FOF and FALN

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