CBTJ vs. BWET

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) and BWET (Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CBTJ is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Calamos, while BWET is a Commodities fund tracking the Breakwave Wet Freight Futures Index. CBTJ is actively managed, while BWET is passively managed. Over the past year, CBTJ returned -36.40% vs 1850.25% for BWET. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. CBTJ charges 0.69%/yr vs 3.50%/yr for BWET.

Performance

CBTJ vs. BWET - 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 Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBTJ achieves a -18.01% return, which is significantly lower than BWET's 1,094.06% return.

CBTJ

• 1D: 0.26%
• 1M: -1.88%
• 6M: -26.05%
• YTD: -18.01%
• 1Y: -36.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BWET

• 1D: -10.62%
• 1M: 15.73%
• 6M: 601.52%
• YTD: 1,094.06%
• 1Y: 1,850.25%
• 3Y*: 126.94%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CBTJ vs. BWET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-18.01%	-11.32%
BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF	1,094.06%	55.99%

Correlation

The correlation between CBTJ and BWET is -0.02, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.02
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2025	-0.05

Return for Risk

CBTJ vs. BWET — 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: 0
CBTJ Omega Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBTJ Martin Ratio Rank: 2

BWET

BWET Risk / Return Rank: 99
BWET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
BWET Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
BWET Omega Ratio Rank: 97
BWET Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
BWET Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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. BWET - 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 Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET). 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	BWET	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.37	17.43	-18.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.03	6.11	-8.14
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.77	1.88	-1.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.86	45.45	-46.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.34	171.98	-173.32

CBTJ vs. BWET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBTJ Sharpe Ratio is -1.37, which is lower than the BWET Sharpe Ratio of 17.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBTJ and BWET, 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. BWET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -42.41%, smaller than the maximum BWET drawdown of -56.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTJ and BWET.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBTJ	BWET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.41%	-56.90%	+14.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-42.41%	-41.22%	-1.19%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-56.81%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.16%	-10.62%	-29.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.07%	-23.67%	+6.60%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	27.24%	10.92%	+16.32%

Volatility

CBTJ vs. BWET - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) is 4.65%, while Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF (BWET) has a volatility of 48.59%. This indicates that CBTJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BWET based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBTJ	BWET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.65%	48.59%	-43.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.27%	97.51%	-80.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.73%	107.51%	-80.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.01%	74.69%	-49.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.01%	74.69%	-49.68%

CBTJ vs. BWET - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBTJ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than BWET's 3.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBTJ vs. BWET - Dividend Comparison

CBTJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, while BWET has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BWET Breakwave Tanker Shipping ETF	0.00%	0.00%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.77%	1.45%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBTJ and BWET in my portfolio?

CBTJ and BWET have a correlation of -0.02, 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 BWET?

BWET has higher volatility (48.59%) compared to CBTJ (4.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTJ dropped -42.41% vs BWET's -56.90%.

Which ETF is better, CBTJ or BWET?

On 1-year performance, BWET leads with 1850.25% vs -36.40% for CBTJ. On fees, CBTJ is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CBTJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.65%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBTJ or BWET?

Over the 1-year period, BWET has performed better with a 1850.25% return vs -36.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBTJ or BWET?

CBTJ is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 3.50% for BWET.

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

CBTJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.77%, compared with 0.00% for BWET.

What is the main difference between CBTJ and BWET?

CBTJ is categorized as Blockchain, while BWET is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBTJ and 3.50% for BWET.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BWET currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (17.43 vs -1.37), 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.