CANQ vs. QBUF
CANQ (Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF) and QBUF (Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly) are both Nasdaq-100 funds. CANQ is actively managed, while QBUF is passively managed. Over the past year, CANQ returned 17.89% vs 11.93% for QBUF. A 0.76 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CANQ charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for QBUF.
Performance
CANQ vs. QBUF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CANQ achieves a 7.60% return, which is significantly higher than QBUF's 4.68% return.
CANQ
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 5.62%
- YTD
- 7.60%
- 6M
- 5.52%
- 1Y
- 17.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
QBUF
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- 0.84%
- YTD
- 4.68%
- 6M
- 4.57%
- 1Y
- 11.93%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CANQ vs. QBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF | 7.60% | 11.69% | 9.63% |
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly | 4.68% | 11.08% | 5.92% |
Correlation
The correlation between CANQ and QBUF is 0.74, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.74 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 2, 2024 | 0.76 |
The correlation between CANQ and QBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.
CANQ vs. QBUF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CANQ
QBUF
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Financial Services
CANQ
QBUF
Basic Materials
CANQ
-
QBUF
Communication Services
CANQ
-
QBUF
Consumer Cyclical
CANQ
-
QBUF
Consumer Defensive
CANQ
-
QBUF
Energy
CANQ
-
QBUF
Healthcare
CANQ
-
QBUF
Industrials
CANQ
-
QBUF
Real Estate
CANQ
-
QBUF
Technology
CANQ
-
QBUF
Utilities
CANQ
-
QBUF
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. QBUF — Risk / Return Rank
CANQ
QBUF
CANQ vs. QBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) and Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF). 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 | QBUF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.84 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.48 | -0.18 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.67 | 5.19 | -3.52 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 5.17 | 17.79 | -12.62 |
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 | QBUF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.67 | 2.28 | -0.61 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.35 | 1.36 | -0.01 |
Drawdowns
CANQ vs. QBUF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CANQ drawdown since its inception was -12.79%, which is greater than QBUF's maximum drawdown of -8.84%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANQ and QBUF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CANQ | QBUF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.79% | -8.84% | -3.95% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.77% | -2.31% | -8.46% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.37% | -0.01% | -0.36% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.95% | -0.82% | -2.13% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.47% | 0.67% | +2.80% |
Volatility
CANQ vs. QBUF - Volatility Comparison
Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) has a higher volatility of 3.86% compared to Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly (QBUF) at 0.23%. This indicates that CANQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than QBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CANQ | QBUF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.86% | 0.23% | +3.63% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.52% | 3.88% | +3.64% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.76% | 5.25% | +5.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 12.69% | 8.47% | +4.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 12.69% | 8.47% | +4.22% |
CANQ vs. QBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison
CANQ has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than QBUF's 0.79% expense ratio.
Dividends
CANQ vs. QBUF - Dividend Comparison
CANQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%, while QBUF has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF | 4.36% | 5.02% | 4.19% |
QBUF Innovator Nasdaq-100 10 Buffer ETF - Quarterly | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CANQ and QBUF have a correlation of 0.74, 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 QBUF (0.23%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANQ dropped -12.79% vs QBUF's -8.84%.
On 1-year performance, CANQ leads with 17.89% vs 11.93% for QBUF. On fees, QBUF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, QBUF has been the lower-risk option at 0.23%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CANQ has performed better with a 17.89% return vs 11.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
QBUF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CANQ.
CANQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.36%, compared with 0.00% for QBUF.
They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for CANQ and 0.79% for QBUF.
QBUF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.28 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 QBUF
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