CBTA vs. TMAR

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

CBTA (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds - CBTA tracks the CBOE Bitcoin US ETF Index while TMAR tracks the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CBTA returned -33.12% vs 21.36% for TMAR. Their 0.39 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CBTA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.

Performance

CBTA vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBTA) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBTA achieves a -24.45% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 11.84% return.

CBTA

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: 2.26%
• 6M: -16.28%
• YTD: -24.45%
• 1Y: -33.12%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -11.98%

TMAR

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.40%
• 6M: 10.68%
• YTD: 11.84%
• 1Y: 21.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 21.07%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CBTA Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	$19.28K	$37.33K	$32.42K
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	$63.51K	$84.79K	$238.06K

CBTA vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBTA Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	-24.45%	11.82%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	11.84%	22.30%

Correlation

The correlation between CBTA and TMAR is 0.43, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025	0.39

Return for Risk

CBTA vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CBTA

CBTA Risk / Return Rank: 2
CBTA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
CBTA Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
CBTA Omega Ratio Rank: 1
CBTA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBTA Martin Ratio Rank: 2

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 81
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 72
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 87
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 84
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 87

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CBTA vs. TMAR - 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 FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.

	CBTA	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.13	1.78	-2.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.61	2.55	-4.17
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.81	1.41	-0.60
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.83	3.36	-4.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.32	13.76	-15.08

CBTA vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBTA Sharpe Ratio is -1.13, which is lower than the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 1.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBTA and TMAR, 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

CBTA vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBTA drawdown since its inception was -39.83%, which is greater than TMAR's maximum drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTA and TMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBTA	TMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.83%	-9.93%	-29.90%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-39.83%	-6.39%	-33.44%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.91%	-3.28%	-33.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.96%	-0.96%	-15.00%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	25.05%	1.56%	+23.49%

Volatility

CBTA vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBTA) is 4.88%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 5.22%. This indicates that CBTA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBTA	TMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.88%	5.22%	-0.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	21.40%	11.39%	+10.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	29.44%	12.07%	+17.37%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.78%	12.73%	+14.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.78%	12.73%	+14.05%

CBTA vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBTA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBTA vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

CBTA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.18%, while TMAR has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CBTA Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	1.18%	0.89%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBTA and TMAR in my portfolio?

CBTA and TMAR have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CBTA or TMAR?

TMAR has higher volatility (5.22%) compared to CBTA (4.88%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTA dropped -39.83% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

Which ETF is better, CBTA or TMAR?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 21.36% vs -33.12% for CBTA. On fees, CBTA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CBTA has been the lower-risk option at 4.88%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBTA or TMAR?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 21.36% return vs -33.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBTA or TMAR?

CBTA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CBTA or TMAR?

CBTA has the higher dividend yield at 1.18%, compared with 0.00% for TMAR.

What is the main difference between CBTA and TMAR?

CBTA tracks CBOE Bitcoin US ETF Index, while TMAR tracks iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBTA and 0.95% for TMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TMAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.78 vs -1.13), 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.