IFLN vs. PHYD

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IFLN (Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF) and PHYD (Putnam ESG High Yield ETF -) are both High Yield Bonds funds. IFLN is passively managed, while PHYD is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, IFLN returned 7.73%/yr vs 8.72%/yr for PHYD. Their correlation of 0.80 suggests significant overlap in exposure. IFLN charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PHYD.

Performance

IFLN vs. PHYD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF (IFLN) and Putnam ESG High Yield ETF - (PHYD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IFLN achieves a 1.07% return, which is significantly lower than PHYD's 2.32% return.

IFLN

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: 0.88%
• YTD: 1.07%
• 6M: 1.28%
• 1Y: 5.63%
• 3Y*: 7.73%
• 5Y*: 3.55%
• 10Y*: 4.63%

PHYD

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: -0.19%
• YTD: 2.32%
• 6M: 2.57%
• 1Y: 7.27%
• 3Y*: 8.72%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IFLN vs. PHYD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
IFLN Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF	1.07%	8.75%	5.54%	8.16%
PHYD Putnam ESG High Yield ETF -	2.32%	8.84%	7.35%	8.30%

Correlation

The correlation between IFLN and PHYD is 0.77, 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	0.77
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.79
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 20, 2023	0.80

The correlation between IFLN and PHYD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IFLN vs. PHYD — Risk / Return Rank

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

IFLN

IFLN Risk / Return Rank: 40
IFLN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
IFLN Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
IFLN Omega Ratio Rank: 45
IFLN Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
IFLN Martin Ratio Rank: 39

PHYD

PHYD Risk / Return Rank: 81
PHYD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
PHYD Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
PHYD Omega Ratio Rank: 83
PHYD Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
PHYD Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

IFLN vs. PHYD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF (IFLN) and Putnam ESG High Yield ETF - (PHYD). 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.

	IFLN	PHYD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.42	2.28	-0.86
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.07	3.62	-1.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.46	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.39	3.66	-2.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.66	14.79	-9.13

IFLN vs. PHYD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IFLN Sharpe Ratio is 1.42, which is lower than the PHYD Sharpe Ratio of 2.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IFLN and PHYD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

IFLN vs. PHYD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IFLN drawdown since its inception was -44.79%, which is greater than PHYD's maximum drawdown of -4.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IFLN and PHYD.

Drawdown Indicators

	IFLN	PHYD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.79%	-4.33%	-40.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.08%	-2.10%	-1.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-4.08%	-4.14%	+0.06%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.76%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-21.52%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.05%	-0.79%	+0.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.32%	-0.62%	-3.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.00%	0.52%	+0.48%

Volatility

IFLN vs. PHYD - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF (IFLN) has a higher volatility of 1.16% compared to Putnam ESG High Yield ETF - (PHYD) at 1.07%. This indicates that IFLN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PHYD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IFLN	PHYD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.16%	1.07%	+0.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	3.29%	2.57%	+0.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.98%	3.36%	+0.62%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	6.38%	4.58%	+1.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.89%	4.58%	+2.31%

IFLN vs. PHYD - Expense Ratio Comparison

IFLN has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than PHYD's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

IFLN vs. PHYD - Dividend Comparison

IFLN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.86%, less than PHYD's 8.52% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IFLN Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF	5.86%	5.48%	5.69%	4.68%	3.52%	3.37%	3.90%	4.03%	4.44%	4.14%	4.58%	4.69%
PHYD Putnam ESG High Yield ETF -	8.52%	6.63%	6.80%	6.15%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IFLN and PHYD in my portfolio?

IFLN and PHYD have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IFLN or PHYD?

IFLN has higher volatility (1.16%) compared to PHYD (1.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IFLN dropped -44.79% vs PHYD's -4.33%.

Which ETF is better, IFLN or PHYD?

On 3-year performance, PHYD leads with 8.72% vs 7.73% for IFLN. On fees, IFLN is cheaper at 0.23% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IFLN or PHYD?

Over the 3-year period, PHYD has performed better with a 8.72% return vs 7.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IFLN or PHYD?

IFLN is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PHYD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IFLN or PHYD?

PHYD has the higher dividend yield at 8.52%, compared with 5.86% for IFLN.

What is the main difference between IFLN and PHYD?

They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Putnam. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for IFLN and 0.55% for PHYD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PHYD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 vs 1.42), 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.