CANQ vs. SCHG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CANQ (Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CANQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Calamos, while SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. CANQ is actively managed, while SCHG is passively managed. Over the past year, CANQ returned 13.55% vs 17.91% for SCHG. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CANQ charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.

Performance

CANQ vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CANQ achieves a 3.74% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 1.35% return.

CANQ

• 1D: -0.86%
• 1M: -1.76%
• YTD: 3.74%
• 6M: 3.40%
• 1Y: 13.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SCHG

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: -3.93%
• YTD: 1.35%
• 6M: 0.09%
• 1Y: 17.91%
• 3Y*: 22.13%
• 5Y*: 13.27%
• 10Y*: 18.65%

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

CANQ vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF	3.74%	11.69%	18.99%
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	1.35%	17.50%	24.50%

Correlation

The correlation between CANQ and SCHG is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2024	0.90

The correlation between CANQ and SCHG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CANQ vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

CANQ

CANQ Risk / Return Rank: 32
CANQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
CANQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
CANQ Omega Ratio Rank: 33
CANQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
CANQ Martin Ratio Rank: 29

SCHG

SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 28
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 30
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 23
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.

	CANQ	SCHG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.19	1.11	+0.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.70	1.56	+0.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.20	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.26	1.10	+0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.84	3.58	+0.26

CANQ vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CANQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.19, which is comparable to the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CANQ and SCHG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CANQ vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CANQ drawdown since its inception was -12.79%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CANQ and SCHG.

Drawdown Indicators

	CANQ	SCHG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.79%	-34.59%	+21.80%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.77%	-16.41%	+5.64%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.39%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.59%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.59%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.94%	-6.46%	+2.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.95%	-5.20%	+2.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.54%	5.02%	-1.48%

Volatility

CANQ vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) is 4.59%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 5.91%. This indicates that CANQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CANQ	SCHG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.59%	5.91%	-1.32%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.39%	12.52%	-4.13%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.44%	16.24%	-4.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.85%	22.38%	-9.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.85%	21.58%	-8.73%

CANQ vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

CANQ has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

CANQ vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

CANQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.52%, more than SCHG's 0.38% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF	4.52%	5.02%	4.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	0.38%	0.36%	0.39%	0.46%	0.55%	0.42%	0.52%	0.82%	1.27%	1.01%	1.04%	1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CANQ and SCHG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, CANQ and SCHG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CANQ or SCHG?

SCHG has higher volatility (5.91%) compared to CANQ (4.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANQ dropped -12.79% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

Which ETF is better, CANQ or SCHG?

On 1-year performance, SCHG leads with 17.91% vs 13.55% for CANQ. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, CANQ has been the lower-risk option at 4.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CANQ or SCHG?

Over the 1-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 17.91% return vs 13.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CANQ or SCHG?

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CANQ.

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

CANQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.52%, compared with 0.38% for SCHG.

What is the main difference between CANQ and SCHG?

CANQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for CANQ and 0.04% for SCHG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CANQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.19 vs 1.11), 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.