PFFA vs PFFD

Key Takeaways

• PFFA is an actively managed, non-diversified preferred-stock fund that uses leverage to boost income, while PFFD is a passive, index-tracking fund offering broad, diversified exposure.
• Cost is a defining difference: PFFA carries a 2.11% expense ratio versus just 0.23% for PFFD, a gap that materially affects long-term total return.
• PFFA tilts toward financials (roughly 53%) and real estate (about 17%) with a higher distribution yield, while PFFD is even more financials-heavy (around 71%) with a lower but steadier yield.
• Structural risk differs sharply — PFFA's leverage and concentrated, non-diversified mandate make it more volatile than PFFD's unleveraged, diversified index approach.
• Tickeron AI Verdict: Based on cost efficiency, diversification, and structural risk, Tickeron's AI currently favors PFFD.

Introduction

Preferred-stock ETFs sit at the intersection of equity-like yields and bond-like income, making them a natural focal point when investors weigh income durability against interest-rate risk. Comparing PFFA and PFFD is instructive because the two funds pursue the same broad asset class through fundamentally different playbooks. PFFA leans on active management and leverage to maximize current income, while PFFD offers a low-cost, rules-based route to the U.S. preferred market. They do not compete directly so much as they represent alternative answers to the same investor question: how to harvest preferred-stock income while managing sensitivity to rates, credit, and concentration.

Virtus InfraCap U.S. Preferred Stock ETF (PFFA) Overview

PFFA is an actively managed fund that seeks current income with capital appreciation as a secondary goal. Under normal conditions it invests at least 80% of net assets in U.S. preferred stock and related derivatives, and it is classified as non-diversified, meaning it can concentrate a larger share of assets in individual issuers. The fund also employs leverage through bank borrowings, a feature that can magnify both income and downside volatility.

The portfolio holds roughly 190 to 200 preferred positions. Sector allocation is dominated by financials (about 53%), followed by real estate (roughly 17%), industrials (around 8%), communication services, utilities, information technology, and energy. Representative top holdings include preferred securities of Strategy Inc., Flagstar Bank, KKR, Oracle, Qwest, Telephone and Data Systems, Energy Transfer, and Boeing. The fund charges a 2.11% expense ratio (including a 0.80% management fee) and has paid monthly distributions. Its relatively high distribution yield — around 8.6% in recent cycles — reflects both its income mandate and its use of leverage.

Global X U.S. Preferred ETF (PFFD) Overview

PFFD is a passively managed fund that seeks to track the ICE BofA Diversified Core U.S. Preferred Securities Index, a capitalization-weighted benchmark of the broad U.S. preferred market with a per-issuer cap of 4.75%. The fund holds roughly 220 to 250 preferred issues and is classified as diversified, with no leverage in its mandate.

The portfolio is heavily weighted toward financial issuers (approximately 71% of exposure), with utilities and a smaller technology sleeve providing balance. Top holdings include preferred and convertible-preferred securities of Boeing, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Oracle, Wells Fargo, Citigroup, KKR, NextEra Energy, Southern Company, Microchip, and Bank of America. PFFD's 0.23% expense ratio is among the lowest in the preferred-stock category, and the fund has made monthly distributions since its 2017 inception. Its trailing yield has ranged near 6.4% to 6.8% in recent cycles.

Industry and Thematic Backdrop

Both funds operate within the preferred-securities market, which is structurally dominated by financial issuers that use preferred shares as a form of regulatory and hybrid capital. Preferreds are inherently interest-rate sensitive: when Treasury yields climb, fixed-coupon preferred prices tend to compress, and when yields fall or stabilize, the asset class generally benefits. Recent cycles have featured a Federal Reserve shifting from restrictive policy toward cuts, lingering inflation concerns, and bank stress-test outcomes — all of which influence preferred valuations. Credit quality has remained generally robust, but the asset class's heavy financials concentration means sector-level bank sentiment and capital-adequacy rules are key catalysts for both funds.

Performance and Positioning Comparison

Across recent market cycles, PFFA has generated stronger absolute total returns than PFFD, aided by its leverage and its tilt toward higher-yielding, often non-investment-grade preferreds. That outperformance has come with meaningfully higher volatility and drawdown risk. PFFD, by contrast, has delivered more muted, index-like returns with lower dispersion, reflecting its unleveraged, diversified construction and its heavier weighting toward large financial issuers.

The relative positioning is best understood as a trade-off: PFFA sacrifices cost efficiency and diversification in pursuit of higher income and active alpha, while PFFD prioritizes low fees, broad coverage, and structural simplicity. In rate-sensitive environments, both funds move in broadly similar directions, but PFFA's leverage amplifies the swings in either direction.

AI Screener

Tickeron's AI Screener is an AI-powered stock and ETF discovery tool that helps traders and investors filter the market using technical patterns, fundamentals, trends, volatility, and AI-driven signals. Users can scan thousands of securities with customizable filters — including industry, market capitalization, technical indicators, price patterns, and performance metrics — to surface trade ideas, breakout candidates, and trending opportunities far more efficiently than manual screening. For investors comparing funds like PFFA and PFFD, the screener offers a structured way to evaluate relative strength and momentum. Explore the AI Screener to see how it ranks your watchlist today.

Tickeron AI Verdict

Weighing observable structural factors, Tickeron's AI would currently lean toward PFFD. The decision hinges on cost efficiency (0.23% versus 2.11%), a diversified and unleveraged structure that lowers tail risk, and the transparency of a rules-based index mandate. While PFFA offers a higher distribution yield and has posted stronger recent total returns, those advantages depend on active decisions and leverage that introduce concentration and volatility. The AI verdict favors PFFD for its superior risk-adjusted, fee-conscious exposure, though it acknowledges that income-maximizing investors may still prefer PFFA's higher payout profile. This assessment is probabilistic in nature and not a personalized recommendation.

Disclaimer

The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.

Disclaimers and Limitations