PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
WOMN vs. CSHP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

WOMN vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) and iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, WOMN achieves a 2.30% return, which is significantly higher than CSHP's 1.86% return.


WOMN

1D
-0.11%
1M
-1.26%
YTD
2.30%
6M
1.80%
1Y
10.76%
3Y*
13.39%
5Y*
8.10%
10Y*

CSHP

1D
-0.01%
1M
0.30%
YTD
1.86%
6M
1.93%
1Y
3.96%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

WOMN vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

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

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

WOMN vs. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank

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

WOMN
WOMN Risk / Return Rank: 2929
Overall Rank
WOMN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2828
Sharpe Ratio Rank
WOMN Sortino Ratio Rank: 2828
Sortino Ratio Rank
WOMN Omega Ratio Rank: 2626
Omega Ratio Rank
WOMN Calmar Ratio Rank: 2929
Calmar Ratio Rank
WOMN Martin Ratio Rank: 3535
Martin Ratio Rank

CSHP
CSHP Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
CSHP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100100
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSHP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSHP Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
CSHP Calmar Ratio Rank: 100100
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSHP Martin Ratio Rank: 100100
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

WOMN vs. CSHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) 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.


WOMNCSHPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-10.23

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-26.85

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

6.67

-5.50

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.39

65.84

-64.46

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.04

395.75

-390.72

WOMN vs. CSHP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current WOMN Sharpe Ratio is 0.99, which is lower than the CSHP Sharpe Ratio of 11.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of WOMN 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

WOMN vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum WOMN drawdown since its inception was -32.23%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for WOMN and CSHP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


WOMNCSHPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.23%

-0.08%

-32.15%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.80%

-0.06%

-7.74%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-17.34%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.80%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.48%

-0.01%

-2.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-5.51%

-0.00%

-5.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.14%

0.01%

+2.13%

Volatility

WOMN vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison

Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF (WOMN) has a higher volatility of 3.22% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.15%. This indicates that WOMN'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


WOMNCSHPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.22%

0.15%

+3.07%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.02%

0.27%

+7.75%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.91%

0.36%

+10.55%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.19%

0.41%

+15.78%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.66%

0.41%

+18.25%

WOMN vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison

WOMN has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.


Dividends

WOMN vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison

WOMN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.80%, less than CSHP's 3.91% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018
CSHP
iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF
3.91%5.39%1.96%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
WOMN
Impact Shares YWCA Women’s Empowerment ETF
0.80%0.76%1.08%1.80%5.59%3.10%6.15%1.12%0.90%

Frequently Asked Questions


WOMN 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.

WOMN has higher volatility (3.22%) compared to CSHP (0.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, WOMN dropped -32.23% vs CSHP's -0.08%.

On 1-year performance, WOMN leads with 10.76% vs 3.96% for CSHP. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, WOMN has performed better with a 10.76% return vs 3.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for WOMN.

CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 0.80% for WOMN.

WOMN is categorized as Large Cap Growth Equities, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Impact Shares and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for WOMN and 0.20% for CSHP.

CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (11.22 vs 0.99), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for WOMN and CSHP

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer