PSQA vs. PCMM

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

PSQA (Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF) and PCMM (BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF) are both CLO funds. PSQA is passively managed, while PCMM is actively managed. Over the past year, PSQA returned 5.59% vs 4.63% for PCMM. At a correlation of -0.14, they often move in opposite directions. PSQA charges 0.21%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for PCMM.

Performance

PSQA vs. PCMM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF (PSQA) and BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSQA achieves a 2.79% return, which is significantly higher than PCMM's 1.97% return.

PSQA

• 1D: -0.10%
• 1M: 0.63%
• 6M: 2.43%
• YTD: 2.79%
• 1Y: 5.59%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PCMM

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: 0.04%
• 6M: 1.76%
• YTD: 1.97%
• 1Y: 4.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSQA vs. PCMM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PSQA Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF	2.79%	5.82%	0.35%
PCMM BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF	1.97%	6.30%	0.37%

Correlation

The correlation between PSQA and PCMM is -0.21, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.21
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2024	-0.14

Return for Risk

PSQA vs. PCMM — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSQA

PSQA Risk / Return Rank: 93
PSQA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
PSQA Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
PSQA Omega Ratio Rank: 94
PSQA Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PSQA Martin Ratio Rank: 95

PCMM

PCMM Risk / Return Rank: 51
PCMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
PCMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
PCMM Omega Ratio Rank: 50
PCMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
PCMM Martin Ratio Rank: 56

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.

PSQA vs. PCMM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF (PSQA) and BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM). 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.

	PSQA	PCMM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	1.39	+0.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.70	1.98	+1.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.26	+0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.19	2.16	+5.03
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	23.48	7.69	+15.78

PSQA vs. PCMM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSQA Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is higher than the PCMM Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSQA and PCMM, 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

PSQA vs. PCMM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSQA drawdown since its inception was -1.25%, smaller than the maximum PCMM drawdown of -4.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSQA and PCMM.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSQA	PCMM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.25%	-4.32%	+3.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.78%	-2.16%	+1.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.10%	-0.67%	+0.57%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.16%	-0.42%	+0.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.24%	0.60%	-0.36%

Volatility

PSQA vs. PCMM - Volatility Comparison

Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF (PSQA) has a higher volatility of 1.21% compared to BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF (PCMM) at 0.85%. This indicates that PSQA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PCMM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSQA	PCMM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.21%	0.85%	+0.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.07%	2.72%	-0.65%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.45%	3.36%	-0.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.35%	4.85%	-2.50%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.35%	4.85%	-2.50%

PSQA vs. PCMM - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSQA has a 0.21% expense ratio, which is lower than PCMM's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSQA vs. PCMM - Dividend Comparison

PSQA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, less than PCMM's 6.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
PCMM BondBloxx Private Credit CLO ETF	6.50%	7.02%	0.00%
PSQA Palmer Square CLO Senior Debt ETF	4.12%	4.48%	1.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSQA and PCMM in my portfolio?

PSQA and PCMM have a correlation of -0.21, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSQA or PCMM?

PSQA has higher volatility (1.21%) compared to PCMM (0.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSQA dropped -1.25% vs PCMM's -4.32%.

Which ETF is better, PSQA or PCMM?

On 1-year performance, PSQA leads with 5.59% vs 4.63% for PCMM. On fees, PSQA is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, PCMM has been the lower-risk option at 0.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSQA or PCMM?

Over the 1-year period, PSQA has performed better with a 5.59% return vs 4.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSQA or PCMM?

PSQA is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for PCMM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSQA or PCMM?

PCMM has the higher dividend yield at 6.50%, compared with 4.12% for PSQA.

What is the main difference between PSQA and PCMM?

They also come from different issuers: Palmer Square and BondBloxx. Their fees differ too: 0.21% for PSQA and 0.68% for PCMM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSQA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.39), 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.