BGB vs EFT: Correlation
Measured on weekly returns over the past three years, Blackstone Strategic Credit 2027 Term Fund (BGB) and Eaton Vance Floating Rate Income Trust (EFT) carry a correlation of 0.71, a strong link.
Data as of 2026-08-27 · refreshed every trading day · weekly returns · methodology
How correlated are BGB and EFT?
On 3 years of weekly data the BGB/EFT correlation comes out at 0.71, strong. The relationship has been stable: the 1-year correlation (0.78) sits close to the 3-year figure. The 5-year figure is 0.69, and annualized covariance runs at 71.5 %².
Few assets follow BGB as closely as EFT, which ranks #2 of 14 tracked partners. Neither side won the trailing year by much: -3.1% against -4.8%.
How is this computed?
Pearson correlation on weekly returns: ρ(A,B) = cov(rA, rB) / (σA · σB), over windows of 52, 156 and 260 weeks. Covariance is annualized (×52) and expressed in %². Full definitions on the methodology page.
BGB vs EFT: side by side
| BGB (Blackstone Strategic Credit 2027 Term Fund) | EFT (Eaton Vance Floating Rate Income Trust) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1-year return | -3.1% | -4.8% |
| 5-year return | +23.0% | +13.9% |
| Volatility (ann.) | 9.3% | 10.9% |
| Beta vs S&P 500 | 0.40 | 0.49 |
| Max drawdown (3Y) | -12.8% | -17.5% |
| Market cap | – | – |
| P/E (trailing) | 16.7 | 42.4 |
| Dividend yield | 0.00% | 9.41% |
| Sector / category | US Listed | US Listed |
Year-by-year returns
| Year | BGB | EFT |
|---|---|---|
| 2022 | -16.1% | -19.7% |
| 2023 | +19.5% | +27.1% |
| 2024 | +18.7% | +13.2% |
| 2025 | +4.8% | -3.8% |
| 2026 | -0.5% | -1.6% |
Calendar-year price returns; the current year is year-to-date as of the data date above.
Are BGB and EFT good diversifiers for each other?
To a limited degree. At 0.71 the two still catch most of the same waves, so the pair smooths returns a little without insulating either from a shared selloff.
FAQ
What is the correlation between BGB and EFT?
As of 2026-08-27, the correlation of weekly returns between BGB and EFT is 0.71 over 3 years, 0.78 over 1 year and 0.69 over 5 years.
Is EFT a good diversifier for BGB?
To a limited degree. At 0.71 the two still catch most of the same waves, so the pair smooths returns a little without insulating either from a shared selloff.
What does a correlation of 0.71 mean?
On the −1 to +1 scale, 0.71 describes how much the two returns move together: +1 is lockstep, 0 is independence, negative values mean opposite directions. It says nothing about which performed better.
Use this data
$ curl https://www.pairbook.io/api/v1/pairs/bgb-vs-eft.json
Markdown for the live badge, attribution link included:
[](https://www.pairbook.io/pair/bgb-vs-eft/)
No key needed, free to use. Full endpoint list in the API documentation.
Related comparisons
Hubs: BGB correlations · EFT correlations
