PFFA vs. CSSD
PFFA (Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF) and CSSD (Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PFFA charges 1.47%/yr vs 0.49%/yr for CSSD.
Performance
PFFA vs. CSSD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PFFA achieves a 2.21% return, which is significantly lower than CSSD's 3.02% return.
PFFA
- 1D
- 0.57%
- 1M
- 0.24%
- 6M
- 0.67%
- YTD
- 2.21%
- 1Y
- 8.19%
- 3Y*
- 12.44%
- 5Y*
- 5.83%
- 10Y*
- —
CSSD
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 0.41%
- 6M
- 2.45%
- YTD
- 3.02%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PFFA vs. CSSD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PFFA Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF | 2.21% | 0.41% |
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 3.02% | 0.49% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFFA and CSSD is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 10, 2025 | 0.52 |
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
PFFA vs. CSSD — Risk / Return Rank
PFFA
CSSD
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
PFFA vs. CSSD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF (PFFA) and Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF (CSSD). 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.
| PFFA | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.20 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.27 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 3.90 | — | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PFFA vs. CSSD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFFA drawdown since its inception was -70.52%, which is greater than CSSD's maximum drawdown of -2.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFFA and CSSD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFFA | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -70.52% | -2.32% | -68.20% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.49% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.15% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -22.70% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.32% | -0.26% | -2.06% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -6.59% | -0.28% | -6.31% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.11% | — | — |
Volatility
PFFA vs. CSSD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFFA | CSSD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.80% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.31% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 7.43% | 3.02% | +4.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.59% | 3.02% | +8.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 31.64% | 3.02% | +28.62% |
PFFA vs. CSSD - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFFA has a 1.47% expense ratio, which is higher than CSSD's 0.49% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFFA vs. CSSD - Dividend Comparison
PFFA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.79%, more than CSSD's 3.15% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSSD Cohen & Steers Short Duration Preferred and Income Active ETF | 3.15% | 0.53% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PFFA Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF | 9.79% | 9.47% | 9.18% | 9.56% | 10.75% | 7.64% | 8.54% | 10.02% | 5.15% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PFFA and CSSD have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CSSD is cheaper at 0.49% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CSSD is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 1.47% for PFFA.
PFFA has the higher dividend yield at 9.79%, compared with 3.15% for CSSD.
They also come from different issuers: Virtus Investment Partners and Cohen & Steers. Their fees differ too: 1.47% for PFFA and 0.49% for CSSD.
Find the right allocation for PFFA and CSSD
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