VOTE vs. SLNZ

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

VOTE (TCW Transform 500 ETF) and SLNZ (TCW Senior Loan ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - VOTE is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Morningstar US Large Cap Index, while SLNZ is a Bank Loan fund actively managed by TCW. VOTE is passively managed, while SLNZ is actively managed. Over the past year, VOTE returned 21.16% vs 4.66% for SLNZ. Their 0.05 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. VOTE charges 0.05%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for SLNZ.

Performance

VOTE vs. SLNZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TCW Transform 500 ETF (VOTE) and TCW Senior Loan ETF (SLNZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VOTE achieves a 10.03% return, which is significantly higher than SLNZ's 2.50% return.

VOTE

• 1D: 0.53%
• 1M: -0.05%
• 6M: 8.71%
• YTD: 10.03%
• 1Y: 21.16%
• 3Y*: 19.65%
• 5Y*: 12.43%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.94%

SLNZ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.53%
• 6M: 3.30%
• YTD: 2.50%
• 1Y: 4.66%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.12%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
SLNZ TCW Senior Loan ETF	$170.20K	$97.68K	$254.02K
VOTE TCW Transform 500 ETF	$1.77M	$1.64M	$2.40M

VOTE vs. SLNZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
VOTE TCW Transform 500 ETF	10.03%	17.95%	0.39%
SLNZ TCW Senior Loan ETF	2.50%	5.21%	0.94%

Correlation

The correlation between VOTE and SLNZ is 0.10, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 18, 2024	0.05

Return for Risk

VOTE vs. SLNZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

VOTE

VOTE Risk / Return Rank: 64
VOTE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
VOTE Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
VOTE Omega Ratio Rank: 60
VOTE Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
VOTE Martin Ratio Rank: 73

SLNZ

SLNZ Risk / Return Rank: 43
SLNZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
SLNZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
SLNZ Omega Ratio Rank: 44
SLNZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
SLNZ Martin Ratio Rank: 47

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

VOTE vs. SLNZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TCW Transform 500 ETF (VOTE) and TCW Senior Loan ETF (SLNZ). 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.

	VOTE	SLNZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.47	1.02	+0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.05	1.37	+0.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.21	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.12	1.74	+0.38
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.96	5.44	+3.52

VOTE vs. SLNZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VOTE Sharpe Ratio is 1.47, which is higher than the SLNZ Sharpe Ratio of 1.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VOTE and SLNZ, 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

VOTE vs. SLNZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VOTE drawdown since its inception was -25.71%, which is greater than SLNZ's maximum drawdown of -2.57%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VOTE and SLNZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	VOTE	SLNZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-25.71%	-2.57%	-23.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.10%	-2.57%	-6.53%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.08%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.71%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.59%	-0.08%	-1.51%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.01%	-0.42%	-5.59%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.15%	0.82%	+1.33%

Volatility

VOTE vs. SLNZ - Volatility Comparison

TCW Transform 500 ETF (VOTE) has a higher volatility of 3.59% compared to TCW Senior Loan ETF (SLNZ) at 0.36%. This indicates that VOTE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SLNZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VOTE	SLNZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.59%	0.36%	+3.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.29%	3.41%	+6.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.11%	4.36%	+8.75%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.20%	4.13%	+13.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.08%	4.13%	+12.95%

VOTE vs. SLNZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

VOTE has a 0.05% expense ratio, which is lower than SLNZ's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

VOTE vs. SLNZ - Dividend Comparison

VOTE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.94%, less than SLNZ's 7.47% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
SLNZ TCW Senior Loan ETF	6.93%	7.39%	1.39%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VOTE TCW Transform 500 ETF	0.94%	1.03%	1.18%	1.33%	1.54%	0.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both VOTE and SLNZ in my portfolio?

VOTE and SLNZ 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, VOTE or SLNZ?

VOTE has higher volatility (3.59%) compared to SLNZ (0.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VOTE dropped -25.71% vs SLNZ's -2.57%.

Which ETF is better, VOTE or SLNZ?

On 1-year performance, VOTE leads with 21.16% vs 4.66% for SLNZ. On fees, VOTE is cheaper at 0.05% per year. On volatility, SLNZ has been the lower-risk option at 0.36%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VOTE or SLNZ?

Over the 1-year period, VOTE has performed better with a 21.16% return vs 4.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VOTE or SLNZ?

VOTE is cheaper with a 0.05% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for SLNZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, VOTE or SLNZ?

SLNZ has the higher dividend yield at 6.93%, compared with 0.94% for VOTE.

What is the main difference between VOTE and SLNZ?

VOTE is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while SLNZ is Bank Loan. Their fees differ too: 0.05% for VOTE and 0.65% for SLNZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

VOTE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.47 vs 1.02), 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.