CLOZ
Generally safe
High confidence
ETF Comparison
CLOZ vs JAAA: Which Is the Better Pick in 2026?
A head-to-head comparison of Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF and Janus Henderson AAA CLO ETF covering yield, cost, risk, and income potential.
Updated November 4, 2026
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Best for
- CLOZInvestors who want higher current income (7.99% vs 4.90% for JAAA).
- JAAAInvestors who want fixed-income ballast that steadies the portfolio when stocks fall.
Price and total return
Compare the same available dates. Add a ticker or benchmark below; these controls change the chart only. The snapshot and article describe the original comparison.
Interactive history loads here. The snapshot and period returns remain available when chart history cannot be loaded.
Distribution Safety Score
An estimate of distribution reliability, not price or principal safety, a probability, or a guarantee. Score methodology.
JAAA
Safe
High confidence
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  CLOZ |  JAAA |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF | Janus Henderson AAA CLO ETF |
| Issuer | Eldridge Capital Management | Janus Henderson |
| Last Close | $25.84 as of November 4, 2026 | $50.50 as of November 4, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | 7.99% | 4.90% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | 7.17% | 4.82% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | 75 | 82 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | 5.99% | 4.02% |
| Expense ratio | 0.50% | 0.20% |
| AUM | $682M | $32.4B |
| Distribution frequency | Monthly | Monthly |
| Underlying index | — | Actively managed (no tracked index recorded) |
| Objective | Seeks current income and capital appreciation by investing primarily in CLO debt tranches rated BBB to B. | Provide exposure to the fund's underlying index or strategy per issuer materials. |
| Asset class | Fixed Income | Fixed Income |
| Inception date | 01/23/2023 | 10/16/2020 |
| Beta | 0.06 | 0.03 |
| Last dividend | $0.172 declared, pays 11/09/2026 | $0.206 declared, pays 11/05/2026 |
| Ex-dividend date | 11/03/2026 | 10/30/2026 |
Total returns
100% reinvested · ex-date convention. Period returns use this fixed assumption, independent of chart settings. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year.
CLOZ has lagged JAAA over the trailing twelve months, posting a 4.52% total return against 4.80%. The picture flips over 3 years, though — CLOZ has compounded at 8.32% a year, ahead of JAAA at 6.06%. JAAA has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 1.2% against 3.7% for CLOZ. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested.
| Symbol | YTD cumulative | 1Y cumulative | 3Y annualized | Since Jan 2023 | Volatility | Sharpe | Sortino | Max drawdown |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CLOZ | 3.45% | 4.52% | 8.32% | 9.50% | 3.7% | 1.05 | 1.38 | -5.3% |
| JAAA | 3.85% | 4.80% | 6.06% | 6.37% | 1.2% | 1.48 | 1.95 | -1.5% |
Total return with all distributions reinvested on the ex-dividend date (a modeling convention, not the cash-settlement date), split-adjusted, as of November 4, 2026. YTD and 1Y are cumulative period returns; 3Y, 5Y, and 10Y are annualized. The shared Since-start window is annualized only when it covers at least one year. “Since Jan 2023” measures every fund from January 24, 2023 — the start of shared available history — so all funds share one comparison window. Volatility is the annualized standard deviation of daily total returns over the trailing 3 years. Sharpe and Sortino divide the annualized return in excess of the risk-free rate by, respectively, that volatility and the downside deviation (both over the trailing 3 years) — higher is better. Max drawdown is the largest peak-to-trough total-return decline over the same window — shallower is better.
Visual comparison
Key metrics
Projected income on $10K
Projections assume the current yield and share price remain constant. Actual results will vary.
Bottom lineChoose CLOZ if you want higher current income (7.99% vs 4.90% for JAAA). Choose JAAA if you want fixed-income ballast that steadies the portfolio when stocks fall.
Income calculator
See how much monthly income a hypothetical investment would generate in each ETF at current yields.
ETFs2
Total AUM$1.04B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Eldridge Capital Management operates a focused ETF lineup concentrated in the fixed income space. With a streamlined product offering, Eldridge Capital Management maintains a niche presence in the ETF market through its specialized bond fund approach.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on CLOZ.
ETFs18
Total AUM$48.3B
ETFs and AUM reflect what Dividend Vision tracks — the issuer's full lineup may be larger.
Their portfolio includes bond-focused funds across credit qualities (JAAA, JBBB, JMBS), an income-oriented equity fund (JSI), and specialized offerings like a Japanese equity fund (JUDO) and a non-leveraged alternatives fund (VNLA). The issuer targets investors seeking steady income streams and diversified exposure across traditional and alternative asset classes.
See our curated list of related YouTube videos on JAAA.
Quick verdict
CLOZ (Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF) and JAAA (Janus Henderson AAA CLO ETF) are both monthly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.
CLOZ offers the higher yield at 7.99% vs 4.90% for JAAA. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.
JAAA is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.20% compared to 0.50%.
JAAA is the larger fund by assets ($32.4B), but assets alone do not establish trading costs or liquidity.
Who should choose each?
Choose CLOZ
Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF
- Want higher current income — CLOZ yields 7.99% vs 4.90% for JAAA.
- Want fixed-income ballast that cushions equity drawdowns.
Choose JAAA
Janus Henderson AAA CLO ETF
- Want fixed-income ballast that cushions equity drawdowns.
- Want to keep costs low — a 0.20% expense ratio vs 0.50% for CLOZ.
Not sure? Use the income calculator and snapshot above to weigh these trade-offs against your own goals.
Top-holdings overlap
Positions that appear in every fund's top 10. Issuers disclose only the largest weights, so this captures the overlap of the concentrated end of each book — not the full portfolios.
— shared positions
CLOZ top-10 holdings unavailable
JAAA 0.0% of its top-10 weight
Top-10 holdings unavailable for CLOZ — cannot compute overlap.
Deep dive
Yield & income
On a $10,000 investment at current distribution rates, CLOZ would pay about $799.00 a year (about $66.58 per monthly distribution), while JAAA would pay about $490.00 a year (about $40.83 per monthly distribution). Both pay monthly distributions.
CLOZ yield7.99%
JAAA yield4.90%
Annual cash diff on $10K$309.00
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, CLOZ would cost approximately $500 in fees vs $200 for JAAA (simplified, not compounded). The $300.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
CLOZ ER0.50%
JAAA ER0.20%
Strategy & risk
CLOZ is an ETF built around CLO exposure, while JAAA is actively managed around AAA-rated CLOs exposure with a bonds approach.
CLOZ beta0.06
JAAA beta0.03
Fund details
CLOZ is managed by Eldridge Capital Management (launched 01/23/2023) with $682M in assets. JAAA is managed by Janus Henderson (launched 10/16/2020) with $32.4B in assets.
CLOZ AUM$682M
JAAA AUM$32.4B
Frequently asked questions
What is the current distribution rate for CLOZ and JAAA?
CLOZ currently distributes 7.99% and JAAA 4.90%, based on fund data updated November 2026. Distribution rate moves with both the payout and the share price, so check the as-of date before relying on either figure.
Is CLOZ or JAAA better for dividend income?
It depends on your goals. CLOZ currently offers the higher distribution yield, which means more income per dollar invested. However, a lower-yield fund may offer better total return or lower volatility. Consider your time horizon and risk tolerance.
What is the difference between CLOZ and JAAA?
CLOZ (Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF) is an ETF built around CLO exposure, while JAAA (Janus Henderson AAA CLO ETF) is actively managed around AAA-rated CLOs exposure with a bonds approach. They are issued by Eldridge Capital Management and Janus Henderson respectively.
Can I hold both CLOZ and JAAA?
Yes — nothing prevents holding both. Whether the combination actually diversifies depends on how much the underlying exposures overlap, which isn't fully measurable from the data on this page; review each security's holdings, sector, and strategy before treating them as complementary.
Is CLOZ or JAAA safer?
By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — JAAA scores 82, CLOZ scores 75, so JAAA's payout currently looks the more resilient of the two. No score makes an investment risk-free — treat this as a screening signal, not a guarantee.
Which has lower fees, CLOZ or JAAA?
CLOZ has an expense ratio of 0.50% while JAAA charges 0.20%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in CLOZ vs JAAA generate?
At current distribution rates, $10,000 in CLOZ would pay about $799.00 a year (about $66.58 per monthly distribution). $10,000 in JAAA would pay about $490.00 a year (about $40.83 per monthly distribution).
Which has performed better historically, CLOZ or JAAA?
CLOZ has lagged JAAA over the trailing twelve months, posting a 4.52% total return against 4.80%. The picture flips over 3 years, though — CLOZ has compounded at 8.32% a year, ahead of JAAA at 6.06%. JAAA has been the steadier holding, though — annualized volatility of 1.2% against 3.7% for CLOZ. Figures are total returns: price change plus every distribution reinvested. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
More comparisons to explore
People also compare CLOZ with
People also compare JAAA with
Popular comparisons
Dividend dates and history
CLOZ vs JAAA — at a glance
Generated October 31, 2026.
Figures quoted in this analysis are from its generation date and may lag the live snapshot table above, which always shows the latest data.
Overview
CLOZ and JAAA are both ETFs providing exposure to collateralized loan obligations (CLOs)—structured debt instruments backed by portfolios of corporate loans—but they target opposite ends of the credit spectrum. CLOZ invests in lower-rated CLO tranches (BBB to B), seeking higher current income, while JAAA focuses exclusively on AAA-rated CLO tranches, prioritizing capital stability. The choice between them hinges on whether an investor prioritizes yield or credit quality.
How they differ
The most important distinction is credit rating and risk profile. JAAA holds only AAA-rated CLO tranches—the safest segment of the CLO capital structure—while CLOZ spans the middle to lower rungs (BBB to B), taking on significantly more credit risk for higher payouts. That difference shows up directly in yields: CLOZ distributes 7.99% versus JAAA's 4.90%, a 2.22 percentage-point gap. JAAA also charges less: 0.20% versus CLOZ's 0.50%, a 30-basis-point difference. On portfolio stability, JAAA's beta of 0.03 slightly edges CLOZ's 0.06, though both are very low, reflecting CLOs' relative insensitivity to broad equity market swings. CLOZ is substantially newer, having 3 years, while JAAA has 6 years.
Who each is best for
- CLOZ: Fits investors seeking enhanced yield from CLO exposure who have tolerance for credit downturns and understand that lower-rated tranches can face losses during periods of rising loan defaults or covenant breaches.
- JAAA: Fits investors prioritizing capital preservation and steady income from a CLO core position, accepting lower yield in exchange for senior-tranche protection and the near-zero default risk that comes with AAA ratings.
Key risks to know
- Credit deterioration in CLO loan portfolios. When underlying corporate borrowers face economic stress, default rates in CLO collateral pools rise, hitting lower tranches first. CLOZ's BBB-to-B exposure is more vulnerable than JAAA's AAA tranches, which typically require widespread defaults before losses mount.
- NAV erosion at elevated yields. CLOZ's 7.99% yield is materially higher than the typical spread-plus-risk-free-rate return in CLO debt markets; that gap may be filled partly through return-of-capital treatment or NAV decline over time, particularly if credit conditions tighten.
- Interest-rate sensitivity in CLO floaters. Both ETFs hold CLO debt that typically floats with SOFR or LIBOR-based benchmarks. When interest-rate volatility spikes or the slope of the yield curve inverts, CLO financing costs and refinancing risk can shift, affecting both price and spread dynamics.
- Concentration in CLO sector. Both funds are entirely dependent on CLO supply, performance, and the appetite of institutional investors for CLO tranches. A structural downturn in CLO origination or a wave of CLO manager failures would affect both, despite their different rating tiers.
Bottom line
JAAA's significantly larger asset base, lower cost, and senior-tranche safety suit investors who view CLOs as a fixed-income core holding and want minimal credit risk. CLOZ's higher yield appeals to those comfortable with mezzanine-level CLO credit risk in pursuit of stronger income, though the distribution sustainability merits scrutiny given the gap between stated yield and typical CLO return levels. Past performance in rising or stable credit environments does not predict outcomes if loan defaults accelerate.
AI-generated analysis for educational purposes only. Verify important details independently; past performance does not guarantee future results.
Learn the method
The metrics behind this comparison, explained in the Academy.
These comparisons follow the Dividend Vision methodology.