CBTJ vs. BLCN

Last updated Jun 25, 2026

CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) and BLCN (Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CBTJ is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Calamos, while BLCN is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Siren NASDAQ Blockchain Economy Index. CBTJ is actively managed, while BLCN is passively managed. Over the past year, CBTJ returned -33.55% vs 19.55% for BLCN. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBTJ charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for BLCN.

Performance

CBTJ vs. BLCN - 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 Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN). 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 BLCN's 7.24% return.

CBTJ

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

BLCN

• 1D: -1.48%
• 1M: 4.64%
• YTD: 7.24%
• 6M: 4.83%
• 1Y: 19.55%
• 3Y*: 8.14%
• 5Y*: -10.44%
• 10Y*: —

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

CBTJ vs. BLCN - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-20.11%	-11.32%
BLCN Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF	7.24%	-2.55%

Correlation

The correlation between CBTJ and BLCN 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 Feb 4, 2025	0.48

Return for Risk

CBTJ vs. BLCN — 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

BLCN

BLCN Risk / Return Rank: 18
BLCN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
BLCN Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
BLCN Omega Ratio Rank: 19
BLCN Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
BLCN Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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. BLCN - 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 Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN). 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	BLCN	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.25	0.54	-1.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.81	0.99	-2.80
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.80	1.12	-0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.81	0.66	-1.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.32	1.40	-2.72

CBTJ vs. BLCN - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBTJ Sharpe Ratio is -1.25, which is lower than the BLCN Sharpe Ratio of 0.54. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBTJ and BLCN, 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. BLCN - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -41.69%, smaller than the maximum BLCN drawdown of -67.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTJ and BLCN.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBTJ	BLCN	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.69%	-67.51%	+25.82%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.69%	-29.53%	-12.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-45.26%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-67.51%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.69%	-47.95%	+6.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-16.10%	-30.39%	+14.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	25.45%	13.99%	+11.46%

Volatility

CBTJ vs. BLCN - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) is 5.28%, while Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN) has a volatility of 14.16%. This indicates that CBTJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BLCN based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBTJ	BLCN	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.28%	14.16%	-8.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.07%	27.25%	-9.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.06%	36.78%	-9.72%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.35%	35.22%	-9.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.35%	31.31%	-5.96%

CBTJ vs. BLCN - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBTJ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than BLCN's 0.68% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBTJ vs. BLCN - Dividend Comparison

CBTJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, less than BLCN's 2.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BLCN Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF	2.69%	3.01%	0.67%	0.54%	1.28%	0.56%	0.58%	1.45%	1.16%
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%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBTJ and BLCN in my portfolio?

CBTJ and BLCN 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, CBTJ or BLCN?

BLCN has higher volatility (14.16%) compared to CBTJ (5.28%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTJ dropped -41.69% vs BLCN's -67.51%.

Which ETF is better, CBTJ or BLCN?

On 1-year performance, BLCN leads with 19.55% vs -33.55% for CBTJ. On fees, BLCN is cheaper at 0.68% 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 BLCN?

Over the 1-year period, BLCN has performed better with a 19.55% 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 BLCN?

BLCN is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBTJ.

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

BLCN has the higher dividend yield at 2.69%, compared with 1.81% for CBTJ.

What is the main difference between CBTJ and BLCN?

CBTJ is categorized as Blockchain, while BLCN is Large Cap Blend Equities. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and SRN Advisors. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBTJ and 0.68% for BLCN.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BLCN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.54 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.