CBOA vs. PQAP

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

CBOA (Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) and PQAP (PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. CBOA is passively managed, while PQAP is actively managed. Over the past year, CBOA returned -5.36% vs 19.07% for PQAP. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBOA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PQAP.

Performance

CBOA vs. PQAP - 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 Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP). 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 PQAP's 10.67% return.

CBOA

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

PQAP

• 1D: -0.96%
• 1M: -0.66%
• YTD: 10.67%
• 6M: 10.77%
• 1Y: 19.07%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CBOA vs. PQAP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBOA Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	-6.53%	5.22%
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	10.67%	22.17%

Correlation

The correlation between CBOA and PQAP is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025	0.44

Return for Risk

CBOA vs. PQAP — 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

PQAP

PQAP Risk / Return Rank: 97
PQAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
PQAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PQAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
PQAP Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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. PQAP - 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 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.

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	PQAP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.99	3.86	-4.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.26	6.02	-7.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	1.92	-1.09
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.62	8.93	-9.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.20	54.70	-55.91

CBOA vs. PQAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBOA Sharpe Ratio is -0.99, which is lower than the PQAP Sharpe Ratio of 3.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBOA and PQAP, 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. PQAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBOA drawdown since its inception was -8.65%, smaller than the maximum PQAP drawdown of -10.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBOA and PQAP.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBOA	PQAP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-8.65%	-10.79%	+2.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.65%	-2.15%	-6.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-8.36%	-1.39%	-6.97%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.62%	-0.61%	-2.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.46%	0.35%	+4.11%

Volatility

CBOA vs. PQAP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBOA) is 1.37%, while PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April (PQAP) has a volatility of 2.63%. This indicates that CBOA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PQAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBOA	PQAP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.37%	2.63%	-1.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.55%	3.99%	+0.56%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.45%	4.99%	+0.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.13%	11.03%	-5.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.13%	11.03%	-5.90%

CBOA vs. PQAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

CBOA vs. PQAP - Dividend Comparison

CBOA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.40%, more than PQAP's 0.02% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
CBOA Calamos Bitcoin Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	2.40%	2.24%
PQAP PGIM Nasdaq-100 Buffer 12 ETF - April	0.02%	0.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBOA and PQAP in my portfolio?

CBOA and PQAP have a correlation of 0.46, 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 PQAP?

PQAP has higher volatility (2.63%) compared to CBOA (1.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBOA dropped -8.65% vs PQAP's -10.79%.

Which ETF is better, CBOA or PQAP?

On 1-year performance, PQAP leads with 19.07% vs -5.36% for CBOA. On fees, PQAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CBOA has been the lower-risk option at 1.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBOA or PQAP?

Over the 1-year period, PQAP has performed better with a 19.07% 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 PQAP?

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

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

CBOA has the higher dividend yield at 2.40%, compared with 0.02% for PQAP.

What is the main difference between CBOA and PQAP?

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

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PQAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.86 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.