CBOA vs. PBFR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CBOA (Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) and PBFR (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. CBOA is passively managed, while PBFR is actively managed. Over the past year, CBOA returned -5.36% vs 11.76% for PBFR. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBOA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PBFR.

Performance

CBOA vs. PBFR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBOA) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBOA achieves a -6.53% return, which is significantly lower than PBFR's 4.21% return.

CBOA

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: -1.85%
• YTD: -6.53%
• 6M: -6.48%
• 1Y: -5.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PBFR

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 0.07%
• YTD: 4.21%
• 6M: 4.15%
• 1Y: 11.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CBOA vs. PBFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBOA Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	-6.53%	5.22%
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF	4.21%	17.03%

Correlation

The correlation between CBOA and PBFR is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025	0.39

Return for Risk

CBOA vs. PBFR — Risk / Return Rank

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

CBOA

CBOA Risk / Return Rank: 2
CBOA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
CBOA Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
CBOA Omega Ratio Rank: 2
CBOA Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
CBOA Martin Ratio Rank: 3

PBFR

PBFR Risk / Return Rank: 89
PBFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
PBFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
PBFR Omega Ratio Rank: 93
PBFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
PBFR Martin Ratio Rank: 92

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.

CBOA vs. PBFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBOA) and PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR). 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.

	CBOA	PBFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.99	2.73	-3.72
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.26	3.95	-5.21
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	1.59	-0.75
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.62	4.19	-4.81
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.20	21.70	-22.91

CBOA vs. PBFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBOA Sharpe Ratio is -0.99, which is lower than the PBFR Sharpe Ratio of 2.73. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBOA and PBFR, 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

CBOA vs. PBFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBOA drawdown since its inception was -8.65%, roughly equal to the maximum PBFR drawdown of -8.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBOA and PBFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBOA	PBFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.65%	-8.50%	-0.15%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.65%	-2.82%	-5.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.36%	-0.52%	-7.84%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.62%	-0.63%	-1.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.46%	0.54%	+3.92%

Volatility

CBOA vs. PBFR - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBOA) has a higher volatility of 1.37% compared to PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF (PBFR) at 1.30%. This indicates that CBOA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PBFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBOA	PBFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.37%	1.30%	+0.07%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.55%	3.51%	+1.04%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.45%	4.35%	+1.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.13%	6.85%	-1.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.13%	6.85%	-1.72%

CBOA vs. PBFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBOA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than PBFR's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBOA vs. PBFR - Dividend Comparison

CBOA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, more than PBFR's 0.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
CBOA Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	2.40%	2.24%	0.00%
PBFR PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 20 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBOA and PBFR in my portfolio?

CBOA and PBFR have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CBOA or PBFR?

CBOA has higher volatility (1.37%) compared to PBFR (1.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBOA dropped -8.65% vs PBFR's -8.50%.

Which ETF is better, CBOA or PBFR?

On 1-year performance, PBFR leads with 11.76% vs -5.36% for CBOA. On fees, PBFR is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBOA or PBFR?

Over the 1-year period, PBFR has performed better with a 11.76% return vs -5.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBOA or PBFR?

PBFR is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBOA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CBOA or PBFR?

CBOA has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 0.01% for PBFR.

What is the main difference between CBOA and PBFR?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBOA and 0.50% for PBFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PBFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.73 vs -0.99), 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.