PFFL vs. CSPF

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

PFFL (ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN) and CSPF (Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. PFFL is passively managed, while CSPF is actively managed. Over the past year, PFFL returned 4.83% vs 8.38% for CSPF. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PFFL charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for CSPF.

Performance

PFFL vs. CSPF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) and Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF (CSPF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PFFL achieves a -1.90% return, which is significantly lower than CSPF's 3.08% return.

PFFL

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -1.40%
• YTD: -1.90%
• 6M: -2.44%
• 1Y: 4.83%
• 3Y*: 4.18%
• 5Y*: -6.57%
• 10Y*: —

CSPF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.63%
• YTD: 3.08%
• 6M: 2.96%
• 1Y: 8.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PFFL vs. CSPF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
PFFL ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN	-1.90%	0.71%
CSPF Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF	3.08%	8.22%

Correlation

The correlation between PFFL and CSPF is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2025	0.43

Return for Risk

PFFL vs. CSPF — Risk / Return Rank

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

PFFL

PFFL Risk / Return Rank: 13
PFFL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
PFFL Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
PFFL Omega Ratio Rank: 12
PFFL Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
PFFL Martin Ratio Rank: 13

CSPF

CSPF Risk / Return Rank: 70
CSPF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
CSPF Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
CSPF Omega Ratio Rank: 75
CSPF Calmar Ratio Rank: 61
CSPF Martin Ratio Rank: 73

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.

PFFL vs. CSPF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) and Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF (CSPF). 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.

	PFFL	CSPF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.28	2.03	-1.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.51	2.97	-2.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.40	-0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.41	2.75	-2.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.94	12.46	-11.51

PFFL vs. CSPF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PFFL Sharpe Ratio is 0.28, which is lower than the CSPF Sharpe Ratio of 2.03. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PFFL and CSPF, 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

PFFL vs. CSPF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PFFL drawdown since its inception was -80.68%, which is greater than CSPF's maximum drawdown of -3.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFFL and CSPF.

Drawdown Indicators

	PFFL	CSPF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.68%	-3.06%	-77.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.92%	-3.06%	-8.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.75%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-48.51%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-39.57%	-0.11%	-39.46%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-28.59%	-0.43%	-28.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.14%	0.67%	+4.47%

Volatility

PFFL vs. CSPF - Volatility Comparison

ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) has a higher volatility of 4.10% compared to Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF (CSPF) at 1.16%. This indicates that PFFL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSPF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PFFL	CSPF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.10%	1.16%	+2.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.67%	3.15%	+7.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.12%	4.15%	+12.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	23.66%	4.17%	+19.49%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	55.16%	4.17%	+50.99%

PFFL vs. CSPF - Expense Ratio Comparison

PFFL has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CSPF's 0.59% expense ratio.

Dividends

PFFL vs. CSPF - Dividend Comparison

PFFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.14%, more than CSPF's 5.14% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CSPF Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF	5.14%	4.63%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
PFFL ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN	13.14%	13.27%	13.76%	13.71%	13.90%	8.82%	9.75%	11.21%	2.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PFFL and CSPF in my portfolio?

PFFL and CSPF have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PFFL or CSPF?

PFFL has higher volatility (4.10%) compared to CSPF (1.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFFL dropped -80.68% vs CSPF's -3.06%.

Which ETF is better, PFFL or CSPF?

On 1-year performance, CSPF leads with 8.38% vs 4.83% for PFFL. On fees, CSPF is cheaper at 0.59% per year. On volatility, CSPF has been the lower-risk option at 1.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PFFL or CSPF?

Over the 1-year period, CSPF has performed better with a 8.38% return vs 4.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PFFL or CSPF?

CSPF is cheaper with a 0.59% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PFFL.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PFFL or CSPF?

PFFL has the higher dividend yield at 13.14%, compared with 5.14% for CSPF.

What is the main difference between PFFL and CSPF?

They also come from different issuers: UBS and Cohen & Steers. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PFFL and 0.59% for CSPF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSPF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 0.28), 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.