CBTJ vs. BLCN
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 -30.49% vs 25.11% for BLCN. At a 0.47 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBTJ charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for BLCN.
Performance
CBTJ vs. BLCN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CBTJ achieves a -17.54% return, which is significantly lower than BLCN's 13.14% return.
CBTJ
- 1D
- -1.16%
- 1M
- -12.47%
- YTD
- -17.54%
- 6M
- -23.16%
- 1Y
- -30.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BLCN
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 8.39%
- YTD
- 13.14%
- 6M
- 9.28%
- 1Y
- 25.11%
- 3Y*
- 10.37%
- 5Y*
- -9.76%
- 10Y*
- —
CBTJ vs. BLCN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January | -17.54% | -11.32% |
BLCN Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF | 13.14% | -4.29% |
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 5, 2025 | 0.47 |
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
CBTJ vs. BLCN — Risk / Return Rank
CBTJ
BLCN
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.
| CBTJ | BLCN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.83 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.78 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.82 | 1.14 | -0.32 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.77 | 0.85 | -1.62 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.29 | 1.82 | -3.11 |
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
| CBTJ | BLCN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.13 | 0.70 | -1.83 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | -0.28 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.82 | 0.08 | -0.90 |
Drawdowns
CBTJ vs. BLCN - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -39.82%, 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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CBTJ | BLCN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.82% | -67.51% | +27.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -39.82% | -29.53% | -10.29% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -45.26% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -67.51% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -39.82% | -45.09% | +5.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.21% | -30.30% | +15.09% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 23.76% | 13.82% | +9.94% |
Volatility
CBTJ vs. BLCN - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) is 4.62%, while Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN) has a volatility of 14.38%. 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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CBTJ | BLCN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.62% | 14.38% | -9.76% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.82% | 27.66% | -8.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.14% | 36.02% | -8.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.62% | 34.93% | -9.31% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.62% | 31.22% | -5.60% |
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 1.76%, less than BLCN's 2.66% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BLCN Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF | 2.66% | 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 | 1.76% | 1.45% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
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.
BLCN has higher volatility (14.38%) compared to CBTJ (4.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTJ dropped -39.82% vs BLCN's -67.51%.
On 1-year performance, BLCN leads with 25.11% vs -30.49% for CBTJ. On fees, BLCN is cheaper at 0.68% per year. On volatility, CBTJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.62%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BLCN has performed better with a 25.11% return vs -30.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BLCN is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBTJ.
BLCN has the higher dividend yield at 2.66%, compared with 1.76% for CBTJ.
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.
BLCN currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.70 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.
Find the right allocation for CBTJ and BLCN
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