PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MBSF vs. CLOZ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MBSF vs. CLOZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) and Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MBSF achieves a 2.30% return, which is significantly lower than CLOZ's 3.25% return.


MBSF

1D
-0.13%
1M
0.25%
6M
1.88%
YTD
2.30%
1Y
5.30%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
5.74%

CLOZ

1D
-0.02%
1M
0.23%
6M
2.09%
YTD
3.25%
1Y
6.00%
3Y*
9.07%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
10.21%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$8.19M$11.37M$8.55M
$1.54M$1.34M$1.61M

MBSF vs. CLOZ - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
MBSF
Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF
2.30%5.85%5.71%
CLOZ
Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF
3.25%5.99%9.75%

Correlation

The correlation between MBSF and CLOZ is -0.00, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

-0.00

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 28, 2024

0.03

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

MBSF vs. CLOZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MBSF
MBSF Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
MBSF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MBSF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8282
Sortino Ratio Rank
MBSF Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
MBSF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
MBSF Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

CLOZ
CLOZ Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
CLOZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CLOZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
CLOZ Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
CLOZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 4343
Calmar Ratio Rank
CLOZ Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MBSF vs. CLOZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) and Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ). 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.


MBSFCLOZDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.41

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

6.25

1.50

+4.75

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.49

4.99

+14.51

MBSF vs. CLOZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MBSF Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the CLOZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MBSF and CLOZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

MBSF vs. CLOZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MBSF drawdown since its inception was -0.97%, smaller than the maximum CLOZ drawdown of -5.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MBSF and CLOZ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MBSFCLOZDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.97%

-5.32%

+4.35%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.79%

-3.90%

+3.11%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-5.32%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.13%

-0.02%

-0.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.22%

-0.37%

+0.15%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.26%

1.17%

-0.91%

Volatility

MBSF vs. CLOZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF (MBSF) is 0.62%, while Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF (CLOZ) has a volatility of 0.69%. This indicates that MBSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CLOZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MBSFCLOZDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.62%

0.69%

-0.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.07%

3.20%

-1.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.85%

3.50%

-0.65%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.26%

3.75%

-0.49%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.26%

3.75%

-0.49%

MBSF vs. CLOZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

MBSF has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than CLOZ's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

MBSF vs. CLOZ - Dividend Comparison

MBSF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.43%, less than CLOZ's 7.30% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
CLOZ
Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF
7.30%7.63%9.09%8.81%
MBSF
Regan Floating Rate MBS ETF
4.43%4.71%4.14%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


MBSF and CLOZ have a correlation of -0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CLOZ has higher volatility (0.69%) compared to MBSF (0.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MBSF dropped -0.97% vs CLOZ's -5.32%.

On 1-year performance, CLOZ leads with 6.00% vs 5.30% for MBSF. On fees, MBSF is cheaper at 0.49% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CLOZ has performed better with a 6.00% return vs 5.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

MBSF is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for CLOZ.

CLOZ has the higher dividend yield at 7.30%, compared with 4.43% for MBSF.

MBSF is categorized as Bank Loan, while CLOZ is CLO. They also come from different issuers: Regan and Eldridge. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for MBSF and 0.50% for CLOZ.

MBSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.74 vs 1.68), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MBSF and CLOZ

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