QOWZ vs. CSHP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QOWZ (Invesco Nasdaq Free Cash Flow Achievers ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QOWZ is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq US Free Cash Flow Achievers Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. QOWZ is passively managed, while CSHP is actively managed. Over the past year, QOWZ returned -4.42% vs 3.94% for CSHP. At a 0.03 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QOWZ charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.

Performance

QOWZ vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Nasdaq Free Cash Flow Achievers ETF (QOWZ) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QOWZ achieves a -8.29% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.83% return.

QOWZ

• 1D: -0.86%
• 1M: -3.41%
• YTD: -8.29%
• 6M: -9.37%
• 1Y: -4.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CSHP

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.27%
• YTD: 1.83%
• 6M: 1.92%
• 1Y: 3.94%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

QOWZ vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QOWZ Invesco Nasdaq Free Cash Flow Achievers ETF	-8.29%	7.24%	10.30%
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.83%	4.10%	2.24%

Correlation

The correlation between QOWZ and CSHP is -0.11, 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	-0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 18, 2024	0.03

The correlation between QOWZ and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.03 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

QOWZ vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

QOWZ

QOWZ Risk / Return Rank: 6
QOWZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
QOWZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
QOWZ Omega Ratio Rank: 6
QOWZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
QOWZ Martin Ratio Rank: 6

CSHP

CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 99
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 99
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

QOWZ vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Nasdaq Free Cash Flow Achievers ETF (QOWZ) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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.

	QOWZ	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.28	11.09	-11.37
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.29	27.60	-27.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.97	6.46	-5.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.25	65.45	-65.70
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.63	381.67	-382.30

QOWZ vs. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QOWZ Sharpe Ratio is -0.28, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 11.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QOWZ and CSHP, 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

QOWZ vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QOWZ drawdown since its inception was -20.36%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QOWZ and CSHP.

Drawdown Indicators

	QOWZ	CSHP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.36%	-0.08%	-20.28%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-17.81%	-0.06%	-17.75%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.78%	-0.04%	-11.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.09%	-0.00%	-4.09%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	7.03%	0.01%	+7.02%

Volatility

QOWZ vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Nasdaq Free Cash Flow Achievers ETF (QOWZ) has a higher volatility of 6.26% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.16%. This indicates that QOWZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QOWZ	CSHP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.26%	0.16%	+6.10%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.54%	0.27%	+12.27%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.64%	0.36%	+15.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.30%	0.41%	+18.89%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.30%	0.41%	+18.89%

QOWZ vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

QOWZ has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

QOWZ vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

QOWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.27%, less than CSHP's 3.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	3.91%	5.39%	1.96%
QOWZ Invesco Nasdaq Free Cash Flow Achievers ETF	0.27%	0.28%	0.66%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QOWZ and CSHP in my portfolio?

QOWZ and CSHP have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QOWZ or CSHP?

QOWZ has higher volatility (6.26%) compared to CSHP (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QOWZ dropped -20.36% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, QOWZ or CSHP?

On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.94% vs -4.42% for QOWZ. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QOWZ or CSHP?

Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.94% return vs -4.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QOWZ or CSHP?

CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for QOWZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QOWZ or CSHP?

CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 0.27% for QOWZ.

What is the main difference between QOWZ and CSHP?

QOWZ is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for QOWZ and 0.20% for CSHP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.09 vs -0.28), 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.