MILN vs. CSHP
MILN (Global X Millennial Consumer ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MILN is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Indxx Millennials Thematic Index, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. MILN is passively managed, while CSHP is actively managed. Over the past year, MILN returned -7.03% vs 3.98% for CSHP. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MILN charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.
Performance
MILN vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MILN achieves a -7.80% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.87% return.
MILN
- 1D
- 1.79%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- -7.80%
- 6M
- -7.93%
- 1Y
- -7.03%
- 3Y*
- 11.34%
- 5Y*
- 1.09%
- 10Y*
- 11.46%
CSHP
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.31%
- YTD
- 1.87%
- 6M
- 1.95%
- 1Y
- 3.98%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MILN vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MILN Global X Millennial Consumer ETF | -7.80% | 4.63% | 15.73% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 1.87% | 4.10% | 2.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between MILN and CSHP is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024 | 0.03 |
The correlation between MILN and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
MILN vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank
MILN
CSHP
MILN vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Millennial Consumer ETF (MILN) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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.
| MILN | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -11.74 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -29.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.95 | 6.83 | -5.88 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.29 | 66.48 | -66.78 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.63 | 400.50 | -401.13 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
MILN vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MILN drawdown since its inception was -44.40%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MILN and CSHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MILN | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -44.40% | -0.08% | -44.32% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -22.32% | -0.06% | -22.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.48% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -44.40% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -44.40% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -14.51% | 0.00% | -14.51% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.68% | -0.00% | -10.68% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.39% | 0.01% | +10.38% |
Volatility
MILN vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison
Global X Millennial Consumer ETF (MILN) has a higher volatility of 5.40% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.15%. This indicates that MILN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MILN | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.40% | 0.15% | +5.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.55% | 0.27% | +13.28% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.32% | 0.35% | +16.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.69% | 0.41% | +22.28% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 22.04% | 0.41% | +21.63% |
MILN vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
MILN has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
MILN vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison
MILN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.27%, less than CSHP's 3.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 3.91% | 5.39% | 1.96% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MILN Global X Millennial Consumer ETF | 0.27% | 0.25% | 0.22% | 0.33% | 0.24% | 0.15% | 0.21% | 0.43% | 0.43% | 0.89% | 0.32% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MILN and CSHP have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MILN has higher volatility (5.40%) compared to CSHP (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MILN dropped -44.40% vs CSHP's -0.08%.
On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.98% vs -7.03% for MILN. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.98% return vs -7.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for MILN.
CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 0.27% for MILN.
MILN is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for MILN and 0.20% for CSHP.
CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.36 vs -0.38), 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.
Find the right allocation for MILN and CSHP
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