PAWZ vs. CSHP
PAWZ (ProShares Pet Care ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PAWZ is a Global Equities fund tracking the FactSet Pet Care Index, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. PAWZ is passively managed, while CSHP is actively managed. Over the past year, PAWZ returned -16.99% vs 3.95% for CSHP. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PAWZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.
Performance
PAWZ vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PAWZ achieves a -13.08% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.85% return.
PAWZ
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- -0.62%
- YTD
- -13.08%
- 6M
- -13.59%
- 1Y
- -16.99%
- 3Y*
- -1.25%
- 5Y*
- -9.68%
- 10Y*
- —
CSHP
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- 0.28%
- YTD
- 1.85%
- 6M
- 1.91%
- 1Y
- 3.95%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PAWZ vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF | -13.08% | 1.21% | -0.87% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 1.85% | 4.10% | 2.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between PAWZ and CSHP is -0.13, 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 | -0.13 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024 | 0.01 |
The correlation between PAWZ and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (1 year) to 0.01 (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
PAWZ vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank
PAWZ
CSHP
PAWZ vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) 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.
| PAWZ | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -11.92 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -27.95 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | 6.17 | -5.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.80 | 49.32 | -50.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.80 | 340.22 | -342.02 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PAWZ vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PAWZ drawdown since its inception was -50.07%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PAWZ and CSHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PAWZ | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -50.07% | -0.08% | -49.99% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -21.26% | -0.08% | -21.18% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.12% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -50.07% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -42.17% | -0.02% | -42.15% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -22.70% | -0.00% | -22.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 9.48% | 0.01% | +9.47% |
Volatility
PAWZ vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison
ProShares Pet Care ETF (PAWZ) has a higher volatility of 5.09% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.17%. This indicates that PAWZ'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
| PAWZ | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.09% | 0.17% | +4.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.01% | 0.27% | +11.74% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.90% | 0.36% | +16.54% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.25% | 0.41% | +19.84% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.66% | 0.41% | +21.25% |
PAWZ vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
PAWZ has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
PAWZ vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison
PAWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.74%, less than CSHP's 3.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% |
PAWZ ProShares Pet Care ETF | 0.74% | 0.81% | 0.63% | 0.44% | 0.54% | 0.18% | 0.14% | 0.35% | 0.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PAWZ and CSHP have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PAWZ has higher volatility (5.09%) compared to CSHP (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PAWZ dropped -50.07% vs CSHP's -0.08%.
On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.95% vs -16.99% for PAWZ. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. 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 3.95% return vs -16.99%. 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 PAWZ.
CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 0.74% for PAWZ.
PAWZ is categorized as Global Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PAWZ and 0.20% for CSHP.
CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (10.91 vs -1.01), 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 PAWZ 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