ICVT vs. FLXR

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ICVT (iShares Convertible Bond ETF) and FLXR (TCW Flexible Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICVT is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund tracking the Barclays U.S. Convertible Cash Pay Bond > $250MM Index, while FLXR is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by TCW. ICVT is passively managed, while FLXR is actively managed. Over the past year, ICVT returned 42.20% vs 5.89% for FLXR. At a 0.17 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ICVT charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for FLXR.

Performance

ICVT vs. FLXR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT) 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, ICVT achieves a 25.28% return, which is significantly higher than FLXR's 1.09% return.

ICVT

• 1D: -0.97%
• 1M: 7.16%
• YTD: 25.28%
• 6M: 24.31%
• 1Y: 42.20%
• 3Y*: 21.04%
• 5Y*: 7.79%
• 10Y*: 13.99%

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)

ICVT vs. FLXR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF	25.28%	18.10%	10.45%
FLXR TCW Flexible Income ETF	1.09%	8.37%	4.77%

Correlation

The correlation between ICVT and FLXR 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 25, 2024	0.17

ICVT vs. FLXR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICVT	FLXR
Technology	55.2%	-
Healthcare	44.8%	62.4%
Consumer Cyclical	13.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Financial Services	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	37.6%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ICVT vs. FLXR — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICVT

ICVT Risk / Return Rank: 87
ICVT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
ICVT Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
ICVT Omega Ratio Rank: 84
ICVT Calmar Ratio Rank: 90
ICVT Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

ICVT vs. FLXR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT) 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.

	ICVT	FLXR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.95	2.61	+0.34
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.84	3.94	-0.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.51	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.62	4.04	+1.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	20.48	17.36	+3.12
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ICVT vs. FLXR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICVT Sharpe Ratio is 2.95, which is comparable to the FLXR Sharpe Ratio of 2.61. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICVT 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

	ICVT	FLXR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.95	2.61	+0.34
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.59	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.91	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	2.65	-1.87

Drawdowns

ICVT vs. FLXR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICVT drawdown since its inception was -33.25%, which is greater than FLXR's maximum drawdown of -1.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICVT and FLXR.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICVT	FLXR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-33.25%	-1.94%	-31.31%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.55%	-1.46%	-6.09%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.97%	-0.23%	-0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.50%	-0.36%	-9.14%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.07%	0.34%	+1.73%

Volatility

ICVT vs. FLXR - Volatility Comparison

iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT) has a higher volatility of 5.53% compared to TCW Flexible Income ETF (FLXR) at 0.76%. This indicates that ICVT'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

	ICVT	FLXR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.53%	0.76%	+4.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.69%	1.65%	+10.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.36%	2.26%	+12.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.23%	2.79%	+10.44%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.50%	2.79%	+12.71%

ICVT vs. FLXR - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICVT has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than FLXR's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICVT vs. FLXR - Dividend Comparison

ICVT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than FLXR's 5.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	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

Can I hold both ICVT and FLXR in my portfolio?

ICVT and FLXR 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, ICVT or FLXR?

ICVT has higher volatility (5.53%) compared to FLXR (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICVT dropped -33.25% vs FLXR's -1.94%.

Which ETF is better, ICVT or FLXR?

On 1-year performance, ICVT leads with 42.20% vs 5.89% for FLXR. On fees, ICVT is cheaper at 0.20% 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, ICVT or FLXR?

Over the 1-year period, ICVT has performed better with a 42.20% return vs 5.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICVT or FLXR?

ICVT is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for FLXR.

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

FLXR has the higher dividend yield at 5.82%, compared with 1.30% for ICVT.

What is the main difference between ICVT and FLXR?

ICVT is categorized as Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds, while FLXR is Multisector Bonds. They also come from different issuers: iShares and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for ICVT and 0.40% for FLXR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ICVT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.95 vs 2.61), 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.