CBTJ vs. ARKF

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) and ARKF (ARK Fintech Innovation ETF) are both Blockchain funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CBTJ returned -33.55% vs -21.66% for ARKF. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CBTJ charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for ARKF.

Performance

CBTJ vs. ARKF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) and ARK Fintech Innovation ETF (ARKF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBTJ achieves a -20.11% return, which is significantly lower than ARKF's -18.69% return.

CBTJ

• 1D: -1.33%
• 1M: -11.35%
• YTD: -20.11%
• 6M: -20.64%
• 1Y: -33.55%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

ARKF

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: -5.19%
• YTD: -18.69%
• 6M: -21.24%
• 1Y: -21.66%
• 3Y*: 24.68%
• 5Y*: -6.31%
• 10Y*: —

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

CBTJ vs. ARKF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-20.11%	-11.32%
ARKF ARK Fintech Innovation ETF	-18.69%	15.90%

Correlation

The correlation between CBTJ and ARKF is 0.64, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2025	0.62

The correlation between CBTJ and ARKF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.62 to 0.64 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CBTJ vs. ARKF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CBTJ

CBTJ Risk / Return Rank: 1
CBTJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
CBTJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Omega Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBTJ Martin Ratio Rank: 3

ARKF

ARKF Risk / Return Rank: 4
ARKF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4
ARKF Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
ARKF Omega Ratio Rank: 4
ARKF Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
ARKF Martin Ratio Rank: 4

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.

CBTJ vs. ARKF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) and ARK Fintech Innovation ETF (ARKF). 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.

	CBTJ	ARKF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.25	-0.65	-0.59
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.81	-0.75	-1.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.80	0.91	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.81	-0.56	-0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.32	-1.00	-0.32

CBTJ vs. ARKF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBTJ Sharpe Ratio is -1.25, which is lower than the ARKF Sharpe Ratio of -0.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBTJ and ARKF, 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

CBTJ vs. ARKF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -41.69%, smaller than the maximum ARKF drawdown of -78.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTJ and ARKF.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBTJ	ARKF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.69%	-78.63%	+36.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.69%	-38.50%	-3.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-38.50%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-75.30%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.69%	-39.05%	-2.64%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.10%	-34.96%	+18.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	25.45%	21.69%	+3.76%

Volatility

CBTJ vs. ARKF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) is 5.28%, while ARK Fintech Innovation ETF (ARKF) has a volatility of 10.83%. This indicates that CBTJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than ARKF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBTJ	ARKF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.28%	10.83%	-5.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.07%	25.14%	-7.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.06%	33.44%	-6.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.35%	42.92%	-17.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.35%	39.74%	-14.39%

CBTJ vs. ARKF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBTJ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than ARKF's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBTJ vs. ARKF - Dividend Comparison

CBTJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, more than ARKF's 0.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
ARKF ARK Fintech Innovation ETF	0.11%	0.09%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.37%	1.25%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.81%	1.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBTJ and ARKF in my portfolio?

CBTJ and ARKF have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CBTJ or ARKF?

ARKF has higher volatility (10.83%) compared to CBTJ (5.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTJ dropped -41.69% vs ARKF's -78.63%.

Which ETF is better, CBTJ or ARKF?

On 1-year performance, ARKF leads with -21.66% vs -33.55% for CBTJ. On fees, CBTJ is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CBTJ has been the lower-risk option at 5.28%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBTJ or ARKF?

Over the 1-year period, ARKF has performed better with a -21.66% return vs -33.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBTJ or ARKF?

CBTJ is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for ARKF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CBTJ or ARKF?

CBTJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.81%, compared with 0.11% for ARKF.

What is the main difference between CBTJ and ARKF?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and ARK. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBTJ and 0.75% for ARKF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

ARKF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.65 vs -1.25), 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.