SAWG vs. CSHP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

SAWG (AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SAWG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by AAM, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SAWG returned 18.49% vs 3.94% for CSHP. At a 0.04 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SAWG charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.

Performance

SAWG vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWG) 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, SAWG achieves a 5.60% return, which is significantly higher than CSHP's 1.83% return.

SAWG

• 1D: -1.44%
• 1M: -2.20%
• YTD: 5.60%
• 6M: 4.59%
• 1Y: 18.49%
• 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)

SAWG vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SAWG AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF	5.60%	11.30%	6.07%
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF	1.83%	4.10%	2.04%

Correlation

The correlation between SAWG and CSHP is -0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2024	0.04

The correlation between SAWG and CSHP shifts across timeframes, from -0.10 (1 year) to 0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

SAWG vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

SAWG

SAWG Risk / Return Rank: 42
SAWG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
SAWG Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
SAWG Omega Ratio Rank: 42
SAWG Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
SAWG Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

SAWG vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWG) 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.

	SAWG	CSHP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.44	11.09	-9.65
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.03	27.60	-25.57
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	6.46	-5.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.64	65.45	-63.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.75	381.67	-374.92

SAWG vs. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SAWG Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 11.09. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SAWG 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

SAWG vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SAWG drawdown since its inception was -18.68%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SAWG and CSHP.

Drawdown Indicators

	SAWG	CSHP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-18.68%	-0.08%	-18.60%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.33%	-0.06%	-11.27%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.32%	-0.04%	-3.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.63%	-0.00%	-2.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.74%	0.01%	+2.73%

Volatility

SAWG vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF (SAWG) has a higher volatility of 4.57% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.16%. This indicates that SAWG'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

	SAWG	CSHP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.57%	0.16%	+4.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.38%	0.27%	+10.11%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.92%	0.36%	+12.56%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.27%	0.41%	+15.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.27%	0.41%	+15.86%

SAWG vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

SAWG has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

SAWG vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

SAWG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.26%, 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%
SAWG AAM Sawgrass U.S. Large Cap Quality Growth ETF	0.26%	0.27%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SAWG and CSHP in my portfolio?

SAWG and CSHP have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SAWG or CSHP?

SAWG has higher volatility (4.57%) compared to CSHP (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SAWG dropped -18.68% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

Which ETF is better, SAWG or CSHP?

On 1-year performance, SAWG leads with 18.49% vs 3.94% for CSHP. 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, SAWG or CSHP?

Over the 1-year period, SAWG has performed better with a 18.49% return vs 3.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SAWG or CSHP?

CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for SAWG.

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

CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 0.26% for SAWG.

What is the main difference between SAWG and CSHP?

SAWG is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: AAM and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for SAWG and 0.20% for CSHP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.09 vs 1.44), 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.