CBTJ vs. CIFU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) and CIFU (T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CBTJ is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Calamos, while CIFU is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by REX. Both are actively managed. A 0.52 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CBTJ charges 0.69%/yr vs 1.50%/yr for CIFU.

Performance

CBTJ vs. CIFU - 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 T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF (CIFU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBTJ achieves a -16.58% return, which is significantly lower than CIFU's 90.91% return.

CBTJ

• 1D: -1.44%
• 1M: -10.52%
• YTD: -16.58%
• 6M: -22.65%
• 1Y: -30.36%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CIFU

• 1D: 0.89%
• 1M: 94.18%
• YTD: 90.91%
• 6M: 10.06%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CBTJ vs. CIFU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-16.58%	-1.79%
CIFU T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF	90.91%	-6.67%

Correlation

The correlation between CBTJ and CIFU is 0.52, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 24, 2025	0.52

Return for Risk

CBTJ vs. CIFU — Risk / Return Rank

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

CBTJ

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

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. CIFU - 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 T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF (CIFU). 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	CIFU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.12	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.59	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.78	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.29	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CBTJ	CIFU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.12	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.80	0.99	-1.79

Drawdowns

CBTJ vs. CIFU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -39.12%, smaller than the maximum CIFU drawdown of -77.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTJ and CIFU.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBTJ	CIFU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.12%	-77.20%	+38.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-39.12%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-39.12%	-9.09%	-30.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.13%	-45.35%	+30.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	23.62%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CBTJ	CIFU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.87%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.34%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.13%	206.19%	-179.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.64%	206.19%	-180.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.64%	206.19%	-180.55%

CBTJ vs. CIFU - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBTJ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than CIFU's 1.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBTJ vs. CIFU - Dividend Comparison

CBTJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.74%, while CIFU has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.74%	1.45%
CIFU T-REX 2X Long CIFR Daily Target ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBTJ and CIFU in my portfolio?

CBTJ and CIFU have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CBTJ or CIFU?

On fees, CBTJ is cheaper at 0.69% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBTJ or CIFU?

CBTJ is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for CIFU.

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

CBTJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 0.00% for CIFU.

What is the main difference between CBTJ and CIFU?

CBTJ is categorized as Blockchain, while CIFU is Leveraged Equities. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and REX. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBTJ and 1.50% for CIFU.