CAIQ vs. CBTJ

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

CAIQ (Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF) and CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) are both exchange-traded funds - CAIQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund tracking the MerQube Nasdaq-100 Vol Advantage Autocallable Index, while CBTJ is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Calamos. CAIQ is passively managed, while CBTJ is actively managed. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CAIQ charges 0.74%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CBTJ.

Performance

CAIQ vs. CBTJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF (CAIQ) and Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CAIQ achieves a 11.57% return, which is significantly higher than CBTJ's -20.32% return.

CAIQ

• 1D: 0.27%
• 1M: -1.17%
• YTD: 11.57%
• 6M: 10.29%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CBTJ

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -11.63%
• YTD: -20.32%
• 6M: -20.85%
• 1Y: -34.58%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CAIQ vs. CBTJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CAIQ Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF	11.57%	4.03%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-20.32%	-5.74%

Correlation

The correlation between CAIQ and CBTJ is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 20, 2025	0.43

Return for Risk

CAIQ vs. CBTJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CAIQ

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CBTJ

CBTJ Risk / Return Rank: 1
CBTJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
CBTJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Omega Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBTJ Martin Ratio Rank: 3

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

CAIQ vs. CBTJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF (CAIQ) and Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ). 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.

	CAIQ	CBTJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	-1.29	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	-1.89	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	0.79	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	-0.83	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	-1.35	—

Drawdowns

CAIQ vs. CBTJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CAIQ drawdown since its inception was -9.06%, smaller than the maximum CBTJ drawdown of -41.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CAIQ and CBTJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CAIQ	CBTJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.06%	-41.84%	+32.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-41.84%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.74%	-41.84%	+40.10%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.68%	-16.18%	+14.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	25.59%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CAIQ	CBTJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.25%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	18.07%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.68%	27.00%	-13.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.68%	25.31%	-11.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.68%	25.31%	-11.63%

CAIQ vs. CBTJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CAIQ has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is higher than CBTJ's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

CAIQ vs. CBTJ - Dividend Comparison

CAIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.61%, more than CBTJ's 1.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
CAIQ Calamos Nasdaq Autocallable Income ETF	8.61%	1.54%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.82%	1.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CAIQ and CBTJ in my portfolio?

CAIQ and CBTJ have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CAIQ or CBTJ?

On fees, CBTJ is cheaper at 0.69% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CAIQ or CBTJ?

CBTJ is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.74% for CAIQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CAIQ or CBTJ?

CAIQ has the higher dividend yield at 8.61%, compared with 1.82% for CBTJ.

What is the main difference between CAIQ and CBTJ?

CAIQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while CBTJ is Blockchain. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for CAIQ and 0.69% for CBTJ.