CANQ vs. PQAP
CANQ (Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF) and PQAP (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April) are both exchange-traded funds - CANQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Calamos, while PQAP is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by PGIM. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CANQ returned 17.89% vs 21.47% for PQAP. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CANQ charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PQAP.
Performance
CANQ vs. PQAP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CANQ achieves a 7.60% return, which is significantly lower than PQAP's 12.09% return.
CANQ
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 5.62%
- YTD
- 7.60%
- 6M
- 5.52%
- 1Y
- 17.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
PQAP
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 2.44%
- YTD
- 12.09%
- 6M
- 13.01%
- 1Y
- 21.47%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CANQ vs. PQAP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF | 7.60% | 11.64% |
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April | 12.09% | 14.48% |
Correlation
The correlation between CANQ and PQAP is 0.83, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.83 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2025 | 0.82 |
The correlation between CANQ and PQAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.83 - a consistent structural relationship.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
CANQ vs. PQAP — Risk / Return Rank
CANQ
PQAP
CANQ vs. PQAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) and PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP). 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 | PQAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -3.18 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.10 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 2.20 | -0.90 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.67 | 15.50 | -13.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.17 | 86.25 | -81.08 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CANQ | PQAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.67 | 4.86 | -3.18 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.35 | 1.76 | -0.41 |
Drawdowns
CANQ vs. PQAP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CANQ drawdown since its inception was -12.79%, which is greater than PQAP's maximum drawdown of -10.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANQ and PQAP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CANQ | PQAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.79% | -10.79% | -2.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.77% | -1.39% | -9.38% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.37% | -0.12% | -0.25% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.95% | -0.60% | -2.35% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.47% | 0.25% | +3.22% |
Volatility
CANQ vs. PQAP - Volatility Comparison
Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) has a higher volatility of 3.86% compared to PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) at 1.02%. This indicates that CANQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PQAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CANQ | PQAP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.86% | 1.02% | +2.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.52% | 3.09% | +4.43% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.76% | 4.45% | +6.31% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.69% | 11.03% | +1.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.69% | 11.03% | +1.66% |
CANQ vs. PQAP - Expense Ratio Comparison
CANQ has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than PQAP's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
CANQ vs. PQAP - Dividend Comparison
CANQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%, more than PQAP's 0.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF | 4.36% | 5.02% | 4.19% |
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April | 0.02% | 0.02% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CANQ and PQAP have a correlation of 0.83, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CANQ has higher volatility (3.86%) compared to PQAP (1.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANQ dropped -12.79% vs PQAP's -10.79%.
On 1-year performance, PQAP leads with 21.47% vs 17.89% for CANQ. On fees, PQAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PQAP has been the lower-risk option at 1.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, PQAP has performed better with a 21.47% return vs 17.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
PQAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CANQ.
CANQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.36%, compared with 0.02% for PQAP.
CANQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while PQAP is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for CANQ and 0.50% for PQAP.
PQAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.86 vs 1.67), 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.
Find the right allocation for CANQ and PQAP
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer