PSQO vs. BINC

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

PSQO (Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF) and BINC (iShares Flexible Income Active ETF) are both Multisector Bonds funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, PSQO returned 5.88% vs 5.94% for BINC. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PSQO charges 0.52%/yr vs 0.40%/yr for BINC.

Performance

PSQO vs. BINC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF (PSQO) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PSQO achieves a 1.80% return, which is significantly higher than BINC's 1.02% return.

PSQO

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.68%
• YTD: 1.80%
• 6M: 2.46%
• 1Y: 5.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BINC

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: 0.50%
• YTD: 1.02%
• 6M: 1.49%
• 1Y: 5.94%
• 3Y*: 7.06%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PSQO vs. BINC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
PSQO Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF	1.80%	7.05%	1.96%
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	1.02%	7.57%	0.37%

Correlation

The correlation between PSQO and BINC is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2024	0.20

Return for Risk

PSQO vs. BINC — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSQO

PSQO Risk / Return Rank: 96
PSQO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
PSQO Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PSQO Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PSQO Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PSQO Martin Ratio Rank: 96

BINC

BINC Risk / Return Rank: 69
BINC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BINC Sortino Ratio Rank: 84
BINC Omega Ratio Rank: 86
BINC Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
BINC Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

PSQO vs. BINC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF (PSQO) and iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC). 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.

	PSQO	BINC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.84	2.62	+1.22
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	6.67	3.81	+2.86
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.90	1.53	+0.37
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	8.81	2.22	+6.59
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	36.37	8.77	+27.60
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PSQO vs. BINC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSQO Sharpe Ratio is 3.84, which is higher than the BINC Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSQO and BINC, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	PSQO	BINC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.84	2.62	+1.22
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	3.19	2.38	+0.81

Drawdowns

PSQO vs. BINC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSQO drawdown since its inception was -0.76%, smaller than the maximum BINC drawdown of -2.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSQO and BINC.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSQO	BINC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.76%	-2.69%	+1.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.66%	-2.69%	+2.03%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-2.69%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.37%	+0.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.11%	-0.36%	+0.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.16%	0.68%	-0.52%

Volatility

PSQO vs. BINC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF (PSQO) is 0.54%, while iShares Flexible Income Active ETF (BINC) has a volatility of 0.76%. This indicates that PSQO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BINC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSQO	BINC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.54%	0.76%	-0.22%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.26%	1.84%	-0.58%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.54%	2.27%	-0.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.00%	3.00%	-1.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.00%	3.00%	-1.00%

PSQO vs. BINC - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSQO has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is higher than BINC's 0.40% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSQO vs. BINC - Dividend Comparison

PSQO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.12%, less than BINC's 5.86% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BINC iShares Flexible Income Active ETF	5.86%	5.86%	6.14%	3.13%
PSQO Palmer Square Credit Opportunities ETF	4.12%	4.45%	1.40%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PSQO and BINC in my portfolio?

PSQO and BINC have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSQO or BINC?

BINC has higher volatility (0.76%) compared to PSQO (0.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSQO dropped -0.76% vs BINC's -2.69%.

Which ETF is better, PSQO or BINC?

On 1-year performance, BINC leads with 5.94% vs 5.88% for PSQO. On fees, BINC is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, PSQO has been the lower-risk option at 0.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSQO or BINC?

Over the 1-year period, BINC has performed better with a 5.94% return vs 5.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSQO or BINC?

BINC is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for PSQO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PSQO or BINC?

BINC has the higher dividend yield at 5.86%, compared with 4.12% for PSQO.

What is the main difference between PSQO and BINC?

They also come from different issuers: Palmer Square and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for PSQO and 0.40% for BINC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PSQO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.84 vs 2.62), 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.