PFFV vs. CSPF
PFFV (Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF) and CSPF (Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF) are both Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds funds. PFFV is passively managed, while CSPF is actively managed. Over the past year, PFFV returned 3.27% vs 7.18% for CSPF. At a 0.40 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PFFV charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.59%/yr for CSPF.
Performance
PFFV vs. CSPF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PFFV achieves a 2.60% return, which is significantly lower than CSPF's 3.14% return.
PFFV
- 1D
- 0.13%
- 1M
- 0.09%
- 6M
- 1.41%
- YTD
- 2.60%
- 1Y
- 3.27%
- 3Y*
- 6.91%
- 5Y*
- 1.99%
- 10Y*
- —
CSPF
- 1D
- -0.23%
- 1M
- 0.19%
- 6M
- 2.17%
- YTD
- 3.14%
- 1Y
- 7.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PFFV vs. CSPF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
PFFV Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF | 2.60% | 0.56% |
CSPF Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF | 3.14% | 8.22% |
Correlation
The correlation between PFFV and CSPF is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2025 | 0.40 |
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
PFFV vs. CSPF — Risk / Return Rank
PFFV
CSPF
PFFV vs. CSPF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF (PFFV) 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.
| PFFV | CSPF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.98 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.45 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.14 | 1.34 | -0.20 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.02 | 2.36 | -1.34 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.82 | 10.90 | -8.08 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PFFV vs. CSPF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PFFV drawdown since its inception was -18.96%, which is greater than CSPF's maximum drawdown of -3.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PFFV and CSPF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PFFV | CSPF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -18.96% | -3.06% | -15.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.23% | -3.06% | -0.17% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.07% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -18.96% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.62% | -0.83% | +0.21% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.12% | -0.43% | -3.69% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.17% | 0.66% | +0.51% |
Volatility
PFFV vs. CSPF - Volatility Comparison
Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF (PFFV) has a higher volatility of 1.51% compared to Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF (CSPF) at 1.29%. This indicates that PFFV'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PFFV | CSPF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.51% | 1.29% | +0.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.06% | 3.17% | -0.11% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.11% | 4.04% | +0.07% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 8.86% | 4.16% | +4.70% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 8.63% | 4.16% | +4.47% |
PFFV vs. CSPF - Expense Ratio Comparison
PFFV has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than CSPF's 0.59% expense ratio.
Dividends
PFFV vs. CSPF - Dividend Comparison
PFFV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.16%, more than CSPF's 5.29% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSPF Cohen & Steers Preferred and Income Opportunities Active ETF | 5.29% | 4.63% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
PFFV Global X Variable Rate Preferred ETF | 8.16% | 8.26% | 7.33% | 7.17% | 6.60% | 5.23% | 2.29% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PFFV and CSPF have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PFFV has higher volatility (1.51%) compared to CSPF (1.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PFFV dropped -18.96% vs CSPF's -3.06%.
On 1-year performance, CSPF leads with 7.18% vs 3.27% for PFFV. On fees, PFFV is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, CSPF has been the lower-risk option at 1.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CSPF has performed better with a 7.18% return vs 3.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PFFV is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.59% for CSPF.
PFFV has the higher dividend yield at 8.16%, compared with 5.29% for CSPF.
They also come from different issuers: Global X and Cohen & Steers. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for PFFV and 0.59% for CSPF.
CSPF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.79 vs 0.80), 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 PFFV and CSPF
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