NULC vs. CSHP

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

NULC (Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - NULC is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the MSCI TIAA ESG USA Large Cap, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. NULC is passively managed, while CSHP is actively managed. Over the past year, NULC returned 27.55% vs 3.96% for CSHP. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.20% expense ratio.

Performance

NULC vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NULC achieves a 12.74% return, which is significantly higher than CSHP's 1.86% return.

NULC

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 1.40%
• YTD: 12.74%
• 6M: 12.27%
• 1Y: 27.55%
• 3Y*: 20.13%
• 5Y*: 11.05%
• 10Y*: —

CSHP

• 1D: -0.01%
• 1M: 0.30%
• YTD: 1.86%
• 6M: 1.93%
• 1Y: 3.96%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NULC vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
NULC Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF	12.74%	16.29%	2.85%
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.86%	4.10%	2.24%

Correlation

The correlation between NULC and CSHP is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024	0.01

The correlation between NULC and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

NULC vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

NULC

NULC Risk / Return Rank: 65
NULC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
NULC Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
NULC Omega Ratio Rank: 63
NULC Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
NULC Martin Ratio Rank: 71

CSHP

CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 99
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

NULC vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) 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.

	NULC	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.08	11.22	-9.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.83	28.31	-25.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	6.67	-5.31
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.10	65.84	-62.74
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.94	395.75	-382.81

NULC vs. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NULC Sharpe Ratio is 2.08, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 11.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NULC and CSHP, 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

NULC vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NULC drawdown since its inception was -34.86%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NULC and CSHP.

Drawdown Indicators

	NULC	CSHP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.86%	-0.08%	-34.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.91%	-0.06%	-8.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.53%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-27.90%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.76%	-0.01%	-1.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.42%	-0.00%	-6.42%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.13%	0.01%	+2.12%

Volatility

NULC vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF (NULC) has a higher volatility of 4.87% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.15%. This indicates that NULC'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.

Volatility by Period

	NULC	CSHP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.87%	0.15%	+4.72%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.51%	0.27%	+10.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.31%	0.36%	+12.95%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.94%	0.41%	+16.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.98%	0.41%	+19.57%

NULC vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NULC and CSHP have an expense ratio of 0.20%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

NULC vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

NULC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.02%, more than CSHP's 3.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	3.91%	5.39%	1.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NULC Nuveen ESG Large-Cap ETF	9.02%	10.17%	1.86%	1.32%	2.37%	6.14%	4.07%	0.77%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NULC and CSHP in my portfolio?

NULC and CSHP have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NULC or CSHP?

NULC has higher volatility (4.87%) compared to CSHP (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NULC dropped -34.86% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, NULC or CSHP?

On 1-year performance, NULC leads with 27.55% vs 3.96% for CSHP. Both ETFs have the same 0.20% expense ratio. 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.

Which ETF has performed better, NULC or CSHP?

Over the 1-year period, NULC has performed better with a 27.55% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NULC or CSHP?

NULC and CSHP have the same expense ratio: 0.20% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NULC or CSHP?

NULC has the higher dividend yield at 9.02%, compared with 3.91% for CSHP.

What is the main difference between NULC and CSHP?

NULC is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and iShares.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.22 vs 2.08), 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.