PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PGF vs. ICVT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PGF vs. ICVT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Financial Preferred ETF (PGF) and iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PGF achieves a -0.02% return, which is significantly lower than ICVT's 26.51% return. Over the past 10 years, PGF has underperformed ICVT with an annualized return of 2.32%, while ICVT has yielded a comparatively higher 14.10% annualized return.


PGF

1D
-0.07%
1M
-1.26%
YTD
-0.02%
6M
0.34%
1Y
5.38%
3Y*
4.01%
5Y*
-0.72%
10Y*
2.32%

ICVT

1D
1.04%
1M
9.19%
YTD
26.51%
6M
26.15%
1Y
44.47%
3Y*
21.44%
5Y*
8.16%
10Y*
14.10%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PGF vs. ICVT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
PGF
Invesco Financial Preferred ETF
-0.02%3.40%6.01%7.73%-19.22%2.65%7.23%14.55%-2.82%10.82%
ICVT
iShares Convertible Bond ETF
26.51%18.10%10.61%15.35%-20.66%-0.66%61.01%21.76%-0.27%16.38%

Correlation

The correlation between PGF and ICVT is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.41

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.43

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.48

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.42

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2015

0.40

PGF vs. ICVT - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
PGF
ICVT

Financial Services

100.0%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

13.0%

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Healthcare

-

44.8%

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

55.2%

Utilities

-

-

Financial Services

PGF
100.0%
ICVT

-

Basic Materials

PGF

-

ICVT

-

Communication Services

PGF

-

ICVT

-

Consumer Cyclical

PGF

-

ICVT
13.0%

Consumer Defensive

PGF

-

ICVT

-

Energy

PGF

-

ICVT

-

Healthcare

PGF

-

ICVT
44.8%

Industrials

PGF

-

ICVT

-

Real Estate

PGF

-

ICVT

-

Technology

PGF

-

ICVT
55.2%

Utilities

PGF

-

ICVT

-

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

PGF vs. ICVT — Risk / Return Rank

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

PGF
PGF Risk / Return Rank: 2323
Overall Rank
PGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2424
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 2424
Sortino Ratio Rank
PGF Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
PGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
PGF Martin Ratio Rank: 2020
Martin Ratio Rank

ICVT
ICVT Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
ICVT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9090
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ICVT Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
ICVT Omega Ratio Rank: 8888
Omega Ratio Rank
ICVT Calmar Ratio Rank: 9191
Calmar Ratio Rank
ICVT Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PGF vs. ICVT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Financial Preferred ETF (PGF) and iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT). 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.


PGFICVTDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

0.86

3.12

-2.26

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

1.29

4.03

-2.73

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.55

-0.40

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.12

5.94

-4.83

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

2.39

21.71

-19.33

PGF vs. ICVT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PGF Sharpe Ratio is 0.86, which is lower than the ICVT Sharpe Ratio of 3.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PGF and ICVT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


PGFICVTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.86

3.12

-2.26

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.06

0.62

-0.68

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.19

0.91

-0.72

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.15

0.79

-0.64

Drawdowns

PGF vs. ICVT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PGF drawdown since its inception was -75.69%, which is greater than ICVT's maximum drawdown of -33.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PGF and ICVT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PGFICVTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-75.69%

-33.25%

-42.44%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-4.69%

-7.55%

+2.86%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.87%

-11.22%

+0.35%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.41%

-29.95%

+6.54%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-28.92%

-33.25%

+4.33%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-5.10%

0.00%

-5.10%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.01%

-9.50%

+2.49%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.19%

2.07%

+0.12%

Volatility

PGF vs. ICVT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Financial Preferred ETF (PGF) is 1.48%, while iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT) has a volatility of 5.38%. This indicates that PGF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ICVT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PGFICVTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.48%

5.38%

-3.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

4.06%

11.67%

-7.61%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.27%

14.32%

-8.05%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

11.36%

13.24%

-1.88%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.01%

15.50%

-3.49%

PGF vs. ICVT - Expense Ratio Comparison

PGF has a 0.62% expense ratio, which is higher than ICVT's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

PGF vs. ICVT - Dividend Comparison

PGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.31%, more than ICVT's 1.28% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ICVT
iShares Convertible Bond ETF
1.28%1.73%2.19%1.85%1.93%7.70%3.98%1.86%4.82%2.56%3.06%1.57%
PGF
Invesco Financial Preferred ETF
6.31%6.30%6.24%6.15%5.95%4.68%4.91%5.14%5.73%5.32%5.92%5.68%

Frequently Asked Questions


PGF and ICVT have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ICVT has higher volatility (5.38%) compared to PGF (1.48%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PGF dropped -75.69% vs ICVT's -33.25%.

On 10-year performance, ICVT leads with 14.10% vs 2.32% for PGF. On fees, ICVT is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, PGF has been the lower-risk option at 1.48%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, ICVT has performed better with a 14.10% return vs 2.32%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ICVT is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.62% for PGF.

PGF has the higher dividend yield at 6.31%, compared with 1.28% for ICVT.

PGF tracks Wachovia Hybrid & Preferred Securities Financial Index, while ICVT tracks Barclays U.S. Convertible Cash Pay Bond > $250MM Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.62% for PGF and 0.20% for ICVT.

ICVT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.12 vs 0.86), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PGF and ICVT

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