CLOZ
Generally safe
High confidence
ETF Comparison
CLOZ vs JBBB: Same Credit Band, Different CLO Manager
A head-to-head of Eldridge's BBB-B CLO ETF and Janus Henderson's B-BBB CLO ETF covering credit, cost, and how cash is made.
Updated November 4, 2026
How these figures are calculated: methodology.
Best for
- CLOZInvestors who want higher current income (7.99% vs 6.15% for JBBB).
- JBBBInvestors 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.
JBBB
Safe
High confidence
Score snapshot as of . Method 1.11.
Side-by-side snapshot
| Metric |  CLOZ |  JBBB |
|---|---|---|
| Full name | Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF | Janus Henderson B-BBB CLO ETF |
| Issuer | Eldridge Capital Management | Janus Henderson |
| Last Close | $25.84 as of November 4, 2026 | $46.90 as of November 4, 2026 |
| Distribution rate | 7.99% | 6.15% |
| Trailing 12-month yield | 7.17% | 6.22% |
| Distribution Safety Score™ | 75 | 82 |
| Safety-Adjusted Yield | 5.99% | 5.04% |
| Expense ratio | 0.50% | 0.47% |
| AUM | $682M | $1.50B |
| 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. | Actively managed ETF that invests in CLO tranches rated B- to BBB+, providing floating-rate exposure to help limit interest rate risk. |
| Asset class | Fixed Income | Fixed Income |
| Inception date | 01/23/2023 | 01/11/2022 |
| Beta | 0.06 | 0.19 |
| Last dividend | $0.172 declared, pays 11/09/2026 | $0.24018 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 outpaced JBBB over the trailing twelve months, posting a 4.52% total return against 4.27%. The lead holds up over 3 years too: CLOZ has compounded at 8.32% a year, against 7.84% for JBBB. 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% |
| JBBB | 3.37% | 4.27% | 7.84% | 8.34% | 3.6% | 0.95 | 1.36 | -4.3% |
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 6.15% for JBBB). Choose JBBB if you want fixed-income ballast that steadies the portfolio when stocks fall.
CLOZ vs JBBB: two BBB-B CLO books
Same credit band, two managers. Credit mix and cost should drive the choice, not which yield is larger on one date.
| CLOZ | JBBB | |
|---|---|---|
| Issuer | Eldridge | Janus Henderson |
| Credit band | BBB-B CLOs | B-BBB CLOs |
| Expense ratio | 0.50% | 0.47% |
| Distribution rate | 7.99% | 6.15% |
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 JBBB.
Quick verdict
CLOZ (Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF) and JBBB (Janus Henderson B-BBB CLO ETF) are both monthly-pay dividend ETFs, but they take different approaches.
CLOZ offers the higher yield at 7.99% vs 6.15% for JBBB. A higher yield means more current income per dollar invested, though it may come with different risk characteristics.
JBBB is cheaper with an expense ratio of 0.47% compared to 0.50%.
JBBB is the larger fund by assets ($1.50B), 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 6.15% for JBBB.
- Want fixed-income ballast that cushions equity drawdowns.
Choose JBBB
Janus Henderson B-BBB CLO ETF
- Want fixed-income ballast that cushions equity drawdowns.
- Want to keep costs low — a 0.47% 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
JBBB 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 JBBB would pay about $615.00 a year (about $51.25 per monthly distribution). Both pay monthly distributions.
CLOZ yield7.99%
JBBB yield6.15%
Annual cash diff on $10K$184.00
Cost & efficiency
Over 10 years on $10,000, CLOZ would cost approximately $500 in fees vs $470 for JBBB (simplified, not compounded). The $30.00 difference may be offset by yield or performance.
CLOZ ER0.50%
JBBB ER0.47%
Strategy & risk
CLOZ is an ETF built around CLO exposure, while JBBB is an actively managed ETF built around CLO exposure.
CLOZ beta0.06
JBBB beta0.19
Fund details
CLOZ is managed by Eldridge Capital Management (launched 01/23/2023) with $682M in assets. JBBB is managed by Janus Henderson (launched 01/11/2022) with $1.50B in assets.
CLOZ AUM$682M
JBBB AUM$1.50B
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between CLOZ and JBBB?
Both sit in the BBB-B CLO band and pay monthly. CLOZ (Eldridge BBB-B CLO ETF) is Eldridge's book. JBBB (Janus Henderson B-BBB CLO ETF) is Janus Henderson's. Cost is 0.50% versus 0.47%; distributions are 7.99% and 6.15% as of November 2026. Size is $682M versus $1.50B. Credit mix and manager are the decision, not which printed yield is larger on one date.
What is the current distribution rate for CLOZ and JBBB?
CLOZ currently distributes 7.99% and JBBB 6.15%, 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 JBBB 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.
Can I hold both CLOZ and JBBB?
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 JBBB safer?
By Dividend Vision's Distribution Safety Score — a rules-based 0–100 estimate of how resilient a distribution looks, where higher is safer — JBBB scores 82, CLOZ scores 75, so JBBB'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 JBBB?
CLOZ has an expense ratio of 0.50% while JBBB charges 0.47%. Lower fees mean more of your investment returns stay in your pocket over time.
How much income does $10,000 in CLOZ vs JBBB 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 JBBB would pay about $615.00 a year (about $51.25 per monthly distribution).
Which has performed better historically, CLOZ or JBBB?
CLOZ has outpaced JBBB over the trailing twelve months, posting a 4.52% total return against 4.27%. The lead holds up over 3 years too: CLOZ has compounded at 8.32% a year, against 7.84% for JBBB. 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 JBBB with
Popular comparisons
CLOZ vs JBBB — 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 JBBB are both fixed-income ETFs that invest in collateralized loan obligation (CLO) debt tranches, targeting monthly income from floating-rate credit exposure. The key distinction is that CLOZ focuses on lower-rated tranches (BBB to B) with a passive approach, while JBBB actively manages a broader credit spectrum (B– to BBB+) and emphasizes floating-rate positioning to mitigate interest-rate sensitivity.
How they differ
JBBB's active management and wider tranche flexibility contrast sharply with CLOZ's narrow, passive weighting to BBB–B debt. JBBB carries a lower expense ratio of 0.47% versus CLOZ's 0.50%, a 3-basis-point gap that compounds over time; JBBB also manages a larger asset base at $1.50B compared to CLOZ's $682M.
Who each is best for
- CLOZ: Fits investors seeking maximum current income from CLO exposure and willing to accept lower-rated debt concentration in exchange for yield. Works for allocators with a shorter time horizon or those prioritizing cash flow over price stability.
- JBBB: Designed for credit-focused investors who value active management discretion, lower fees, and floating-rate protection against rising interest rates. Suits longer-term holders comfortable with modest equity correlation and wanting flexibility across the CLO credit spectrum.
Key risks to know
- Credit and tranche risk: CLOZ's narrower focus on BBB–B tranches concentrates exposure to the riskier end of the CLO capital stack, amplifying losses if CLO loan pools deteriorate.
- Interest-rate sensitivity and floating-rate basis risk: Although both hold floating-rate CLO debt, JBBB explicitly targets floating-rate positioning to hedge rate risk, whereas CLOZ does not emphasize this protection; if short-term funding rates spike or CLO benchmark spreads widen, both may see NAV declines, but CLOZ's structure offers less explicit mitigation.
- Liquidity and secondary-market CLO pricing: CLO tranches trade less frequently and with wider bid-ask spreads than corporate bonds; either fund may face pricing gaps or redemption delays during market stress, and NAV transparency can lag actual market conditions.
Bottom line
If you prioritize maximum yield and are comfortable with lower-rated CLO tranches and higher equity market correlation, CLOZ offers an attractive 7.99% payout. If you prefer active oversight, a lower fee load, and floating-rate interest-rate protection, JBBB's 0.47% cost and structured approach may align better with a steadier income strategy. Both concentrate on a niche credit market; verify that the yield meets your true return expectations and that CLO credit cycles match your risk tolerance. Past performance does not predict future results.
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.