NUSA vs. FCSH

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

NUSA (Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF) and FCSH (Federated Hermes Short Duration Corporate ETF) are both Short-Term Bond funds. NUSA is passively managed, while FCSH is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, NUSA returned 4.37%/yr vs 5.06%/yr for FCSH. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. NUSA charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for FCSH.

Performance

NUSA vs. FCSH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA) and Federated Hermes Short Duration Corporate ETF (FCSH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NUSA achieves a 0.48% return, which is significantly lower than FCSH's 0.52% return.

NUSA

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 0.22%
• YTD: 0.48%
• 6M: 0.72%
• 1Y: 3.56%
• 3Y*: 4.37%
• 5Y*: 1.53%
• 10Y*: —

FCSH

• 1D: -0.14%
• 1M: -0.02%
• YTD: 0.52%
• 6M: 0.90%
• 1Y: 3.94%
• 3Y*: 5.06%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NUSA vs. FCSH - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
NUSA Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF	0.48%	5.89%	3.52%	5.19%	-5.91%	-0.12%
FCSH Federated Hermes Short Duration Corporate ETF	0.52%	6.42%	4.66%	5.45%	-5.87%	0.24%

Correlation

The correlation between NUSA and FCSH 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	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 20, 2021	0.85

The correlation between NUSA and FCSH has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NUSA vs. FCSH — Risk / Return Rank

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

NUSA

NUSA Risk / Return Rank: 62
NUSA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
NUSA Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
NUSA Omega Ratio Rank: 66
NUSA Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
NUSA Martin Ratio Rank: 57

FCSH

FCSH Risk / Return Rank: 65
FCSH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
FCSH Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
FCSH Omega Ratio Rank: 66
FCSH Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
FCSH Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

NUSA vs. FCSH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA) and Federated Hermes Short Duration Corporate ETF (FCSH). 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.

	NUSA	FCSH	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.98	2.03	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.13	3.14	-0.01
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.39	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.79	3.18	-0.39
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.89	11.23	-1.34
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NUSA vs. FCSH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NUSA Sharpe Ratio is 1.98, which is comparable to the FCSH Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NUSA and FCSH, 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

	NUSA	FCSH	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.98	2.03	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.55	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.82	0.85	-0.03

Drawdowns

NUSA vs. FCSH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NUSA drawdown since its inception was -9.44%, which is greater than FCSH's maximum drawdown of -8.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NUSA and FCSH.

Drawdown Indicators

	NUSA	FCSH	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.44%	-8.47%	-0.97%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.28%	-1.24%	-0.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-1.62%	-1.32%	-0.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-9.44%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.46%	-0.62%	+0.16%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.65%	-2.21%	+0.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.36%	0.35%	+0.01%

Volatility

NUSA vs. FCSH - Volatility Comparison

Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (NUSA) has a higher volatility of 0.66% compared to Federated Hermes Short Duration Corporate ETF (FCSH) at 0.59%. This indicates that NUSA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FCSH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NUSA	FCSH	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.66%	0.59%	+0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.33%	1.54%	-0.21%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82%	1.96%	-0.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.80%	2.89%	-0.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.72%	2.89%	-0.17%

NUSA vs. FCSH - Expense Ratio Comparison

NUSA has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than FCSH's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

NUSA vs. FCSH - Dividend Comparison

NUSA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.86%, less than FCSH's 4.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FCSH Federated Hermes Short Duration Corporate ETF	4.09%	4.14%	4.44%	2.31%	1.76%	0.04%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
NUSA Nuveen ESG 1-5 Year U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF	3.86%	3.83%	3.93%	3.54%	2.44%	2.16%	2.51%	2.85%	3.22%	2.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NUSA and FCSH in my portfolio?

NUSA and FCSH 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, NUSA or FCSH?

NUSA has higher volatility (0.66%) compared to FCSH (0.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NUSA dropped -9.44% vs FCSH's -8.47%.

Which ETF is better, NUSA or FCSH?

On 3-year performance, FCSH leads with 5.06% vs 4.37% for NUSA. On fees, NUSA is cheaper at 0.15% 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, NUSA or FCSH?

Over the 3-year period, FCSH has performed better with a 5.06% return vs 4.37%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NUSA or FCSH?

NUSA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for FCSH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, NUSA or FCSH?

FCSH has the higher dividend yield at 4.09%, compared with 3.86% for NUSA.

What is the main difference between NUSA and FCSH?

They also come from different issuers: Nuveen and Federated. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for NUSA and 0.30% for FCSH.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FCSH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.98), 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.