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 -6.81%/yr vs 5.91%/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 -3.27% return, which is significantly lower than CWB's 14.65% return.
PFFL
- 1D
- -1.16%
- 1M
- -3.46%
- 6M
- -7.41%
- YTD
- -3.27%
- 1Y
- -0.36%
- 3Y*
- 3.48%
- 5Y*
- -6.81%
- 10Y*
- —
CWB
- 1D
- -1.98%
- 1M
- -7.17%
- 6M
- 9.23%
- YTD
- 14.65%
- 1Y
- 21.91%
- 3Y*
- 14.53%
- 5Y*
- 5.91%
- 10Y*
- 11.69%
PFFL vs. CWB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PFFL ETRACS Monthly Pay 2xLeveraged Preferred Stock ETN | -3.27% | 2.18% | 4.77% | 8.65% | -39.15% | 7.52% | -15.47% | 30.21% | -10.77% |
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 14.65% | 16.61% | 10.06% | 14.49% | -20.81% | 2.18% | 53.39% | 22.39% | -9.42% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFFL and CWB is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.46 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.51 |
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 0.42 to 0.51 - 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 | -1.40 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.81 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.01 | 1.24 | -0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.03 | 2.67 | -2.71 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.06 | 8.53 | -8.60 |
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% | -8.23% | -3.69% |
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 | -40.41% | -8.23% | -32.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.68% | -6.15% | -22.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 5.63% | 2.57% | +3.06% |
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 5.15%. 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% | 5.15% | -1.05% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.00% | 13.31% | -2.31% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.37% | 15.98% | +0.39% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 23.70% | 13.35% | +10.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 54.95% | 14.62% | +40.33% |
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 12.72%, more than CWB's 1.46% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CWB SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Convertible Securities ETF | 1.46% | 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 | 12.72% | 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 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CWB has higher volatility (5.15%) 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 5.91% vs -6.81% 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 5.91% return vs -6.81%. 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 12.72%, compared with 1.46% 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 (1.38 vs -0.02), 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