STEN vs. CLOA

Last updated Jul 11, 2026

STEN (iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF) and CLOA (iShares AAA CLO Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - STEN is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by BlackRock, while CLOA is a CLO fund actively managed by BlackRock. Both are actively managed. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. STEN charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CLOA.

Performance

STEN vs. CLOA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF (STEN) and iShares AAA CLO Active ETF (CLOA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, STEN achieves a 8.76% return, which is significantly higher than CLOA's 2.44% return.

STEN

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 2.21%
• 6M: 7.40%
• YTD: 8.76%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CLOA

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.30%
• 6M: 2.31%
• YTD: 2.44%
• 1Y: 5.09%
• 3Y*: 6.52%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

STEN vs. CLOA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
STEN iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF	8.76%	2.36%
CLOA iShares AAA CLO Active ETF	2.44%	1.31%

Correlation

The correlation between STEN and CLOA is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 1, 2025	0.30

Return for Risk

STEN vs. CLOA — Risk / Return Rank

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

STEN

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CLOA

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

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.

STEN vs. CLOA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF (STEN) and iShares AAA CLO Active ETF (CLOA). 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.

	STEN	CLOA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	7.65	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	14.44	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	3.48	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	29.05	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	152.91	—

Drawdowns

STEN vs. CLOA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum STEN drawdown since its inception was -6.21%, which is greater than CLOA's maximum drawdown of -1.34%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for STEN and CLOA.

Drawdown Indicators

	STEN	CLOA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.21%	-1.34%	-4.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-0.18%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.91%	-0.05%	-0.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.03%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	STEN	CLOA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.14%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	0.48%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.28%	0.67%	+8.61%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.28%	1.30%	+7.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.28%	1.30%	+7.98%

STEN vs. CLOA - Expense Ratio Comparison

STEN has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than CLOA's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

STEN vs. CLOA - Dividend Comparison

STEN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.29%, less than CLOA's 4.90% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CLOA iShares AAA CLO Active ETF	4.90%	5.35%	6.01%	5.88%
STEN iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF	0.29%	0.31%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both STEN and CLOA in my portfolio?

STEN and CLOA have a correlation of 0.30, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, STEN or CLOA?

On fees, CLOA is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, STEN or CLOA?

CLOA is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for STEN.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, STEN or CLOA?

CLOA has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 0.29% for STEN.

What is the main difference between STEN and CLOA?

STEN is categorized as Defined Outcome, while CLOA is CLO. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for STEN and 0.20% for CLOA.