JOJO vs. PYLD

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

JOJO (ATAC Credit Rotation ETF) and PYLD (PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JOJO returned 9.64% vs 7.40% for PYLD. A 0.71 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. JOJO charges 1.28%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PYLD.

Performance

JOJO vs. PYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ATAC Credit Rotation ETF (JOJO) and PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund (PYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JOJO achieves a 2.29% return, which is significantly higher than PYLD's 0.95% return.

JOJO

• 1D: -0.25%
• 1M: 0.31%
• YTD: 2.29%
• 6M: 2.64%
• 1Y: 9.64%
• 3Y*: 6.59%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PYLD

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 0.53%
• YTD: 0.95%
• 6M: 1.31%
• 1Y: 7.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JOJO vs. PYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
JOJO ATAC Credit Rotation ETF	2.29%	10.52%	2.74%	4.75%
PYLD PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund	0.95%	9.57%	7.69%	5.60%

Correlation

The correlation between JOJO and PYLD is 0.68, 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	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2023	0.71

The correlation between JOJO and PYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

JOJO vs. PYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	JOJO	PYLD
Utilities	99.7%	-
Real Estate	0.3%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Financial Services	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

JOJO vs. PYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

JOJO

JOJO Risk / Return Rank: 42
JOJO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
JOJO Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
JOJO Omega Ratio Rank: 45
JOJO Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
JOJO Martin Ratio Rank: 37

PYLD

PYLD Risk / Return Rank: 66
PYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
PYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
PYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 79
PYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
PYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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.

JOJO vs. PYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ATAC Credit Rotation ETF (JOJO) and PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund (PYLD). 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.

	JOJO	PYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	2.42	-0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.23	3.56	-1.33
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.48	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.96	2.29	-0.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.66	10.44	-4.78
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

JOJO vs. PYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JOJO Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the PYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JOJO and PYLD, 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

	JOJO	PYLD	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.46	2.42	-0.95
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.05	2.04	-2.10

Drawdowns

JOJO vs. PYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JOJO drawdown since its inception was -28.43%, which is greater than PYLD's maximum drawdown of -4.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JOJO and PYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	JOJO	PYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.43%	-4.52%	-23.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.93%	-3.25%	-1.68%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-9.43%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.89%	-0.44%	-5.45%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.82%	-0.65%	-15.17%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.71%	0.71%	+1.00%

Volatility

JOJO vs. PYLD - Volatility Comparison

ATAC Credit Rotation ETF (JOJO) and PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund (PYLD) have volatilities of 1.20% and 1.24%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	JOJO	PYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.20%	1.24%	-0.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.83%	2.50%	+2.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.62%	3.08%	+3.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.31%	3.99%	+7.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.31%	3.99%	+7.32%

JOJO vs. PYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

JOJO has a 1.28% expense ratio, which is higher than PYLD's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

JOJO vs. PYLD - Dividend Comparison

JOJO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.13%, less than PYLD's 6.30% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
JOJO ATAC Credit Rotation ETF	5.13%	4.78%	4.88%	4.30%	3.63%	2.53%
PYLD PIMCO ETF Trust - PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund	6.30%	6.21%	6.40%	2.72%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JOJO and PYLD in my portfolio?

JOJO and PYLD have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JOJO or PYLD?

PYLD has higher volatility (1.24%) compared to JOJO (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JOJO dropped -28.43% vs PYLD's -4.52%.

Which ETF is better, JOJO or PYLD?

On 1-year performance, JOJO leads with 9.64% vs 7.40% for PYLD. On fees, PYLD is cheaper at 0.55% 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, JOJO or PYLD?

Over the 1-year period, JOJO has performed better with a 9.64% return vs 7.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JOJO or PYLD?

PYLD is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 1.28% for JOJO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, JOJO or PYLD?

PYLD has the higher dividend yield at 6.30%, compared with 5.13% for JOJO.

What is the main difference between JOJO and PYLD?

They also come from different issuers: ATAC and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 1.28% for JOJO and 0.55% for PYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PYLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 1.46), 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.