HYGW vs. FLRT

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

HYGW (iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF) and FLRT (Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF) are both High Yield Bonds funds. HYGW is passively managed, while FLRT is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, HYGW returned 5.64%/yr vs 8.90%/yr for FLRT. At a 0.26 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.69% expense ratio.

Performance

HYGW vs. FLRT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (HYGW) and Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HYGW achieves a 1.69% return, which is significantly lower than FLRT's 1.83% return.

HYGW

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: 0.68%
• YTD: 1.69%
• 6M: 2.54%
• 1Y: 6.60%
• 3Y*: 5.64%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FLRT

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.90%
• YTD: 1.83%
• 6M: 2.55%
• 1Y: 6.08%
• 3Y*: 8.90%
• 5Y*: 5.98%
• 10Y*: 5.00%

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

HYGW vs. FLRT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
HYGW iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF	1.69%	6.19%	6.99%	7.31%	-0.12%
FLRT Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF	1.83%	6.24%	9.18%	14.59%	-0.17%

Correlation

The correlation between HYGW and FLRT is 0.22, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.22
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 23, 2022	0.26

HYGW vs. FLRT - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	HYGW	FLRT
Utilities	99.6%	-
Real Estate	0.4%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	0.8%
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	99.2%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

HYGW vs. FLRT — Risk / Return Rank

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

HYGW

HYGW Risk / Return Rank: 77
HYGW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
HYGW Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
HYGW Omega Ratio Rank: 83
HYGW Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
HYGW Martin Ratio Rank: 82

FLRT

FLRT Risk / Return Rank: 85
FLRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
FLRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
FLRT Omega Ratio Rank: 97
FLRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 68
FLRT Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

HYGW vs. FLRT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (HYGW) and Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT). 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.

	HYGW	FLRT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.36	3.89	-1.52
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.48	6.03	-2.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.95	-0.44
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.65	3.43	+0.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.70	12.62	+4.08
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

HYGW vs. FLRT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HYGW Sharpe Ratio is 2.36, which is lower than the FLRT Sharpe Ratio of 3.89. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HYGW and FLRT, 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

	HYGW	FLRT	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.36	3.89	-1.52
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	2.61	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.81	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.25	0.75	+0.50

Drawdowns

HYGW vs. FLRT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HYGW drawdown since its inception was -5.49%, smaller than the maximum FLRT drawdown of -20.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HYGW and FLRT.

Drawdown Indicators

	HYGW	FLRT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.49%	-20.96%	+15.47%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.82%	-1.78%	-0.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.66%	-2.87%	-0.79%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-7.60%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-20.96%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.16%	-0.15%	-0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.61%	-1.41%	+0.80%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.40%	0.48%	-0.08%

Volatility

HYGW vs. FLRT - Volatility Comparison

iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF (HYGW) has a higher volatility of 0.88% compared to Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF (FLRT) at 0.40%. This indicates that HYGW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLRT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HYGW	FLRT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.88%	0.40%	+0.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.21%	1.19%	+1.02%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.81%	1.57%	+1.24%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.68%	2.30%	+2.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.68%	6.17%	-1.49%

HYGW vs. FLRT - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both HYGW and FLRT have an expense ratio of 0.69%.

Dividends

HYGW vs. FLRT - Dividend Comparison

HYGW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.56%, more than FLRT's 6.81% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLRT Pacific Global Senior Loan ETF	6.81%	6.93%	7.93%	8.40%	5.81%	3.16%	3.52%	4.30%	3.95%	3.20%	3.38%	3.21%
HYGW iShares High Yield Corporate Bond Buywrite Strategy ETF	11.56%	12.53%	12.30%	15.98%	8.71%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HYGW and FLRT in my portfolio?

HYGW and FLRT have a correlation of 0.22, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HYGW or FLRT?

HYGW has higher volatility (0.88%) compared to FLRT (0.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HYGW dropped -5.49% vs FLRT's -20.96%.

Which ETF is better, HYGW or FLRT?

On 3-year performance, FLRT leads with 8.90% vs 5.64% for HYGW. Both ETFs have the same 0.69% expense ratio. On volatility, FLRT has been the lower-risk option at 0.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, HYGW or FLRT?

Over the 3-year period, FLRT has performed better with a 8.90% return vs 5.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, HYGW or FLRT?

HYGW and FLRT have the same expense ratio: 0.69% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, HYGW or FLRT?

HYGW has the higher dividend yield at 11.56%, compared with 6.81% for FLRT.

What is the main difference between HYGW and FLRT?

They also come from different issuers: iShares and Pacific Life.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FLRT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.89 vs 2.36), 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.