CBTJ vs. CPNS

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) and CPNS (Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September) are both exchange-traded funds - CBTJ is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Calamos, while CPNS is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the MerQube Cap Protect US Large Cap Tech PR Index - Sep. CBTJ is actively managed, while CPNS is passively managed. Over the past year, CBTJ returned -30.49% vs 7.68% for CPNS. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.69% expense ratio.

Performance

CBTJ vs. CPNS - 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 Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPNS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBTJ achieves a -17.54% return, which is significantly lower than CPNS's 3.05% return.

CBTJ

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: -12.47%
• YTD: -17.54%
• 6M: -23.16%
• 1Y: -30.49%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CPNS

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.72%
• YTD: 3.05%
• 6M: 3.25%
• 1Y: 7.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CBTJ vs. CPNS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-17.54%	-11.32%
CPNS Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September	3.05%	6.26%

Correlation

The correlation between CBTJ and CPNS is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 5, 2025	0.43

Return for Risk

CBTJ vs. CPNS — 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: 3
CBTJ Martin Ratio Rank: 3

CPNS

CPNS Risk / Return Rank: 95
CPNS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
CPNS Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CPNS Omega Ratio Rank: 96
CPNS Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
CPNS Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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. CPNS - 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 Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPNS). 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	CPNS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.13	3.63	-4.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.59	5.61	-7.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	1.81	-0.99
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.77	5.87	-6.64
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.29	31.91	-33.19
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CBTJ vs. CPNS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBTJ Sharpe Ratio is -1.13, which is lower than the CPNS Sharpe Ratio of 3.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBTJ and CPNS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CBTJ	CPNS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-1.13	3.63	-4.75
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.82	2.19	-3.01

Drawdowns

CBTJ vs. CPNS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -39.82%, which is greater than CPNS's maximum drawdown of -3.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTJ and CPNS.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBTJ	CPNS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.82%	-3.99%	-35.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-39.82%	-1.31%	-38.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-39.82%	0.00%	-39.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-15.21%	-0.35%	-14.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	23.76%	0.24%	+23.52%

Volatility

CBTJ vs. CPNS - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) has a higher volatility of 4.62% compared to Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPNS) at 0.31%. This indicates that CBTJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CPNS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBTJ	CPNS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.62%	0.31%	+4.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.82%	1.74%	+17.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.14%	2.13%	+25.01%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.62%	3.47%	+22.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.62%	3.47%	+22.15%

CBTJ vs. CPNS - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both CBTJ and CPNS have an expense ratio of 0.69%.

Dividends

CBTJ vs. CPNS - Dividend Comparison

CBTJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.76%, while CPNS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.76%	1.45%
CPNS Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBTJ and CPNS in my portfolio?

CBTJ and CPNS have a correlation of 0.42, 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 CPNS?

CBTJ has higher volatility (4.62%) compared to CPNS (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTJ dropped -39.82% vs CPNS's -3.99%.

Which ETF is better, CBTJ or CPNS?

On 1-year performance, CPNS leads with 7.68% vs -30.49% for CBTJ. Both ETFs have the same 0.69% expense ratio. On volatility, CPNS has been the lower-risk option at 0.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBTJ or CPNS?

Over the 1-year period, CPNS has performed better with a 7.68% return vs -30.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBTJ or CPNS?

CBTJ and CPNS have the same expense ratio: 0.69% per year.

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

CBTJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.76%, compared with 0.00% for CPNS.

What is the main difference between CBTJ and CPNS?

CBTJ is categorized as Blockchain, while CPNS is Defined Outcome.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CPNS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.63 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.