ICVT vs. CSSD
ICVT (iShares Convertible Bond ETF) and CSSD (Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. ICVT is passively managed, while CSSD is actively managed. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ICVT charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for CSSD.
Performance
ICVT vs. CSSD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ICVT achieves a 24.42% return, which is significantly higher than CSSD's 2.72% return.
ICVT
- 1D
- -1.95%
- 1M
- 3.04%
- YTD
- 24.42%
- 6M
- 22.70%
- 1Y
- 40.17%
- 3Y*
- 20.04%
- 5Y*
- 6.76%
- 10Y*
- 14.18%
CSSD
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.68%
- YTD
- 2.72%
- 6M
- 2.91%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ICVT vs. CSSD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF | 24.42% | -1.51% |
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 2.72% | 0.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between ICVT and CSSD is 0.38, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2025 | 0.38 |
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
ICVT vs. CSSD — Risk / Return Rank
ICVT
CSSD
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ICVT vs. CSSD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT) and Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF (CSSD). 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.
| ICVT | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.46 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.35 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 18.22 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ICVT vs. CSSD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ICVT drawdown since its inception was -33.25%, which is greater than CSSD's maximum drawdown of -2.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICVT and CSSD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ICVT | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.25% | -2.32% | -30.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.55% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.22% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -29.95% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -33.25% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.95% | -0.20% | -1.75% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.46% | -0.29% | -9.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.21% | — | — |
Volatility
ICVT vs. CSSD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ICVT | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.08% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.10% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.68% | 3.08% | +12.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.51% | 3.08% | +10.43% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.61% | 3.08% | +12.53% |
ICVT vs. CSSD - Expense Ratio Comparison
ICVT has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than CSSD's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
ICVT vs. CSSD - Dividend Comparison
ICVT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than CSSD's 2.63% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 2.63% | 0.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF | 1.30% | 1.73% | 2.19% | 1.85% | 1.93% | 7.70% | 3.98% | 1.86% | 4.82% | 2.56% | 3.06% | 1.57% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ICVT and CSSD have a correlation of 0.38, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ICVT is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ICVT is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for CSSD.
CSSD has the higher dividend yield at 2.63%, compared with 1.30% for ICVT.
They also come from different issuers: iShares and Cohen & Steers. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ICVT and 0.49% for CSSD.
Find the right allocation for ICVT and CSSD
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