PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CANQ vs. SCHG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CANQ achieves a 7.60% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 6.42% return.


CANQ

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

SCHG

1D
-1.23%
1M
4.81%
YTD
6.42%
6M
5.81%
1Y
24.64%
3Y*
25.02%
5Y*
15.59%
10Y*
18.77%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CANQ vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024
CANQ
Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF
7.60%11.69%19.48%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
6.42%17.50%26.25%

Correlation

The correlation between CANQ and SCHG is 0.90, 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

0.90

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 14, 2024

0.90

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

CANQ vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
CANQ
SCHG

Financial Services

82.1%
6.7%

Basic Materials

-

1.4%

Communication Services

-

16.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.7%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.7%

Energy

-

0.8%

Healthcare

-

7.7%

Industrials

-

5.8%

Real Estate

-

0.5%

Technology

-

46.3%

Utilities

-

0.4%

Financial Services

CANQ
82.1%
SCHG
6.7%

Basic Materials

CANQ

-

SCHG
1.4%

Communication Services

CANQ

-

SCHG
16.0%

Consumer Cyclical

CANQ

-

SCHG
12.7%

Consumer Defensive

CANQ

-

SCHG
1.7%

Energy

CANQ

-

SCHG
0.8%

Healthcare

CANQ

-

SCHG
7.7%

Industrials

CANQ

-

SCHG
5.8%

Real Estate

CANQ

-

SCHG
0.5%

Technology

CANQ

-

SCHG
46.3%

Utilities

CANQ

-

SCHG
0.4%

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. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

CANQ
CANQ Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
CANQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4848
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CANQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
CANQ Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
CANQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
CANQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4545
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4343
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 4343
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3333
Martin Ratio Rank
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.


CANQSCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.08

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.19

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.28

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.67

1.51

+0.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.17

5.04

+0.13

CANQ vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CANQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.67, which is comparable to the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.60. 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CANQSCHGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.67

1.60

+0.08

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.70

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.87

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.35

0.84

+0.51

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CANQSCHGDifference

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

-0.37%

-1.78%

+1.41%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.95%

-5.20%

+2.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.47%

4.90%

-1.43%

Volatility

CANQ vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) has a higher volatility of 3.86% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 3.61%. This indicates that CANQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CANQSCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.86%

3.61%

+0.25%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.52%

11.62%

-4.10%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.76%

15.50%

-4.74%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.69%

22.27%

-9.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.69%

21.55%

-8.86%

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 4.36%, more than SCHG's 0.36% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CANQ
Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF
4.36%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
0.36%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


With a correlation of 0.90, 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.

CANQ has higher volatility (3.86%) compared to SCHG (3.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CANQ dropped -12.79% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 1-year performance, SCHG leads with 24.64% vs 17.89% for CANQ. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 3.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 24.64% return vs 17.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

CANQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.36%, compared with 0.36% for 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.

CANQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.67 vs 1.60), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CANQ and SCHG

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