PFFL vs. CWB
PFFL (ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN) and CWB (SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds - PFFL tracks the Solactive Preferred Stock ETF Index while CWB tracks the Bloomberg US Convertibles Liquid Bond. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, PFFL returned -6.57%/yr vs 6.58%/yr for CWB. A 0.51 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. PFFL charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for CWB.
Performance
PFFL vs. CWB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PFFL achieves a -1.90% return, which is significantly lower than CWB's 22.11% return.
PFFL
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- -1.40%
- YTD
- -1.90%
- 6M
- -2.44%
- 1Y
- 4.83%
- 3Y*
- 4.18%
- 5Y*
- -6.57%
- 10Y*
- —
CWB
- 1D
- -1.97%
- 1M
- 2.60%
- YTD
- 22.11%
- 6M
- 20.22%
- 1Y
- 36.00%
- 3Y*
- 18.53%
- 5Y*
- 6.58%
- 10Y*
- 12.98%
PFFL vs. CWB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PFFL ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN | -1.90% | 2.18% | 4.77% | 8.65% | -39.15% | 7.52% | -15.47% | 30.21% | -10.77% |
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 22.11% | 16.61% | 10.06% | 14.49% | -20.81% | 2.18% | 53.39% | 22.39% | -9.42% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFFL and CWB is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.43 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 26, 2018 | 0.51 |
The correlation between PFFL and CWB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.43 to 0.52 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
PFFL vs. CWB — Risk / Return Rank
PFFL
CWB
PFFL vs. CWB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) and SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB). 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 | CWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.08 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.57 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.07 | 1.42 | -0.36 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.41 | 4.81 | -4.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 0.94 | 16.23 | -15.29 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PFFL vs. CWB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFFL drawdown since its inception was -80.68%, which is greater than CWB's maximum drawdown of -32.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFFL and CWB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFFL | CWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -80.68% | -32.06% | -48.62% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -11.92% | -7.52% | -4.40% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -23.75% | -11.92% | -11.83% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -48.51% | -28.41% | -20.10% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -32.06% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -39.57% | -2.26% | -37.31% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.59% | -6.16% | -22.43% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.14% | 2.22% | +2.92% |
Volatility
PFFL vs. CWB - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN (PFFL) is 4.10%, while SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF (CWB) has a volatility of 6.78%. This indicates that PFFL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CWB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFFL | CWB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.10% | 6.78% | -2.68% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 10.67% | 12.74% | -2.07% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.12% | 15.29% | +1.83% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.66% | 13.21% | +10.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 55.16% | 14.57% | +40.59% |
PFFL vs. CWB - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFFL has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than CWB's 0.40% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFFL vs. CWB - Dividend Comparison
PFFL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.14%, more than CWB's 1.37% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 1.37% | 1.69% | 1.85% | 1.97% | 2.21% | 1.97% | 2.34% | 3.03% | 6.17% | 4.25% | 4.60% | 7.52% |
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% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PFFL and CWB have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CWB has higher volatility (6.78%) compared to PFFL (4.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFFL dropped -80.68% vs CWB's -32.06%.
On 5-year performance, CWB leads with 6.58% vs -6.57% for PFFL. On fees, CWB is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, PFFL has been the lower-risk option at 4.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, CWB has performed better with a 6.58% return vs -6.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CWB is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for PFFL.
PFFL has the higher dividend yield at 13.14%, compared with 1.37% for CWB.
PFFL tracks Solactive Preferred Stock ETF Index, while CWB tracks Bloomberg US Convertibles Liquid Bond. They also come from different issuers: UBS and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for PFFL and 0.40% for CWB.
CWB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.37 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.
Find the right allocation for PFFL and CWB
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