XLSI vs. ICVT
XLSI (Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF) and ICVT (iShares Convertible Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLSI is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by State Street, while ICVT is a Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Convertible Cash Pay Bond > $250MM Index. XLSI is actively managed, while ICVT is passively managed. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. XLSI charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for ICVT.
Performance
XLSI vs. ICVT - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XLSI achieves a 6.26% return, which is significantly lower than ICVT's 18.95% return.
XLSI
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- 0.18%
- 6M
- 3.33%
- YTD
- 6.26%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ICVT
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- -2.72%
- 6M
- 14.16%
- YTD
- 18.95%
- 1Y
- 30.12%
- 3Y*
- 16.90%
- 5Y*
- 6.47%
- 10Y*
- 13.21%
XLSI vs. ICVT - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XLSI Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF | 6.26% | -1.06% |
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF | 18.95% | 7.64% |
Correlation
The correlation between XLSI and ICVT is -0.19, 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 30, 2025 | -0.19 |
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
XLSI vs. ICVT — Risk / Return Rank
XLSI
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
ICVT
XLSI vs. ICVT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF (XLSI) and iShares Convertible Bond ETF (ICVT). 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.
| XLSI | ICVT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.32 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.01 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 12.37 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XLSI vs. ICVT - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XLSI drawdown since its inception was -7.87%, smaller than the maximum ICVT drawdown of -33.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLSI and ICVT.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XLSI | ICVT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -7.87% | -33.25% | +25.38% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -7.55% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -11.22% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -29.95% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.25% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.31% | -6.26% | +3.95% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.24% | -9.44% | +6.20% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 2.44% | — |
Volatility
XLSI vs. ICVT - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XLSI | ICVT | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 6.57% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 13.66% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.07% | 16.33% | -5.26% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 11.07% | 13.64% | -2.57% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 11.07% | 15.66% | -4.59% |
XLSI vs. ICVT - Expense Ratio Comparison
XLSI has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than ICVT's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
XLSI vs. ICVT - Dividend Comparison
XLSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.94%, more than ICVT's 1.35% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICVT iShares Convertible Bond ETF | 1.35% | 1.73% | 2.19% | 1.85% | 1.93% | 7.70% | 3.98% | 1.86% | 4.82% | 2.56% | 3.06% | 1.57% |
XLSI Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR Premium Income ETF | 11.94% | 5.34% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XLSI and ICVT have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, ICVT is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
ICVT is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for XLSI.
XLSI has the higher dividend yield at 11.94%, compared with 1.35% for ICVT.
XLSI is categorized as Derivative Income, while ICVT is Preferred Stock/Convertible Bonds. They also come from different issuers: State Street and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for XLSI and 0.20% for ICVT.
Find the right allocation for XLSI and ICVT
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