CBTA vs. STEN
CBTA (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) and STEN (iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF) are both Defined Outcome funds. CBTA is passively managed, while STEN is actively managed. At a 0.50 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBTA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for STEN.
Performance
CBTA vs. STEN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CBTA achieves a -23.76% return, which is significantly lower than STEN's 7.79% return.
CBTA
- 1D
- -1.31%
- 1M
- -9.26%
- YTD
- -23.76%
- 6M
- -26.89%
- 1Y
- -28.38%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
STEN
- 1D
- -0.30%
- 1M
- 3.31%
- YTD
- 7.79%
- 6M
- 8.22%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CBTA vs. STEN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CBTA Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | -23.76% | -14.92% |
STEN iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF | 7.79% | 2.05% |
Correlation
The correlation between CBTA and STEN is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 2, 2025 | 0.50 |
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
CBTA vs. STEN — Risk / Return Rank
CBTA
STEN
CBTA vs. STEN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBTA) and iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF (STEN). 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.
| CBTA | STEN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.84 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.78 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.42 | — | — |
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
| CBTA | STEN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.98 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.47 | 1.67 | -2.14 |
Drawdowns
CBTA vs. STEN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CBTA drawdown since its inception was -36.74%, which is greater than STEN's maximum drawdown of -6.21%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTA and STEN.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CBTA | STEN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -36.74% | -6.21% | -30.53% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -36.74% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -36.33% | -0.30% | -36.03% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.99% | -0.92% | -12.07% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 20.01% | — | — |
Volatility
CBTA vs. STEN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CBTA | STEN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.51% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.83% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 28.99% | 9.24% | +19.75% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 27.68% | 9.24% | +18.44% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 27.68% | 9.24% | +18.44% |
CBTA vs. STEN - Expense Ratio Comparison
CBTA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than STEN's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
CBTA vs. STEN - Dividend Comparison
CBTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.17%, more than STEN's 0.29% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CBTA Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | 1.17% | 0.89% |
STEN iShares Large Cap 10% Target Buffer Sep ETF | 0.29% | 0.31% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CBTA and STEN have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, STEN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
STEN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBTA.
CBTA has the higher dividend yield at 1.17%, compared with 0.29% for STEN.
They also come from different issuers: Calamos and BlackRock. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBTA and 0.50% for STEN.
Find the right allocation for CBTA and STEN
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