CANQ vs. CBTJ

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CANQ (Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF) and CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) are both exchange-traded funds - CANQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Calamos, while CBTJ is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Calamos. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CANQ returned 17.89% vs -30.36% for CBTJ. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CANQ charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CBTJ.

Performance

CANQ vs. CBTJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) 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, CANQ achieves a 7.60% return, which is significantly higher than CBTJ's -16.58% return.

CANQ

• 1D: -0.37%
• 1M: 5.62%
• YTD: 7.60%
• 6M: 5.52%
• 1Y: 17.89%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CBTJ

• 1D: -1.44%
• 1M: -10.52%
• YTD: -16.58%
• 6M: -22.65%
• 1Y: -30.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CANQ vs. CBTJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF	7.60%	8.69%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-16.58%	-11.32%

Correlation

The correlation between CANQ and CBTJ is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2025	0.41

Return for Risk

CANQ vs. CBTJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

CANQ

CANQ Risk / Return Rank: 42
CANQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
CANQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
CANQ Omega Ratio Rank: 47
CANQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
CANQ Martin Ratio Rank: 34

CBTJ

CBTJ Risk / Return Rank: 2
CBTJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
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.

CANQ vs. CBTJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) 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.

	CANQ	CBTJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.67	-1.12	+2.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.37	-1.59	+3.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	0.82	+0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.67	-0.78	+2.45
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.17	-1.29	+6.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CANQ vs. CBTJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CANQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is higher than the CBTJ Sharpe Ratio of -1.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CANQ and CBTJ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CANQ	CBTJ	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.67	-1.12	+2.80
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.35	-0.80	+2.15

Drawdowns

CANQ vs. CBTJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CANQ drawdown since its inception was -12.79%, smaller than the maximum CBTJ drawdown of -39.12%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANQ and CBTJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	CANQ	CBTJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.79%	-39.12%	+26.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.77%	-39.12%	+28.35%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.37%	-39.12%	+38.75%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.95%	-15.13%	+12.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.47%	23.62%	-20.15%

Volatility

CANQ vs. CBTJ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) is 3.86%, while Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) has a volatility of 4.87%. This indicates that CANQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CBTJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CANQ	CBTJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.86%	4.87%	-1.01%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.52%	19.34%	-11.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.76%	27.13%	-16.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.69%	25.64%	-12.95%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.69%	25.64%	-12.95%

CANQ vs. CBTJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

CANQ has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than CBTJ's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

CANQ vs. CBTJ - Dividend Comparison

CANQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%, more than CBTJ's 1.74% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF	4.36%	5.02%	4.19%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.74%	1.45%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CANQ and CBTJ in my portfolio?

CANQ and CBTJ have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CANQ or CBTJ?

CBTJ has higher volatility (4.87%) compared to CANQ (3.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANQ dropped -12.79% vs CBTJ's -39.12%.

Which ETF is better, CANQ or CBTJ?

On 1-year performance, CANQ leads with 17.89% vs -30.36% for CBTJ. On fees, CBTJ is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CANQ has been the lower-risk option at 3.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CANQ or CBTJ?

Over the 1-year period, CANQ has performed better with a 17.89% return vs -30.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CANQ or CBTJ?

CBTJ is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CANQ.

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

CANQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.36%, compared with 1.74% for CBTJ.

What is the main difference between CANQ and CBTJ?

CANQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while CBTJ is Blockchain. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for CANQ and 0.69% for CBTJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CANQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.67 vs -1.12), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.