CBTJ vs. CSHP
CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) and CSHP (iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CBTJ is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Calamos, while CSHP is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by iShares. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CBTJ returned -33.55% vs 3.89% for CSHP. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. CBTJ charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for CSHP.
Performance
CBTJ vs. CSHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CBTJ achieves a -20.11% return, which is significantly lower than CSHP's 1.79% return.
CBTJ
- 1D
- -1.33%
- 1M
- -11.35%
- YTD
- -20.11%
- 6M
- -20.64%
- 1Y
- -33.55%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CSHP
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.23%
- YTD
- 1.79%
- 6M
- 1.85%
- 1Y
- 3.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CBTJ vs. CSHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January | -20.11% | -11.32% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 1.79% | 3.70% |
Correlation
The correlation between CBTJ and CSHP is -0.08, 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 | -0.08 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2025 | -0.03 |
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. CSHP — Risk / Return Rank
CBTJ
CSHP
CBTJ vs. CSHP - 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 iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP). 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 | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -12.06 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -27.97 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.80 | 6.09 | -5.29 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.81 | 48.60 | -49.40 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.32 | 338.28 | -339.60 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CBTJ vs. CSHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -41.69%, which is greater than CSHP's maximum drawdown of -0.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTJ and CSHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CBTJ | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -41.69% | -0.08% | -41.61% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -41.69% | -0.08% | -41.61% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -41.69% | -0.08% | -41.61% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.10% | -0.00% | -16.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 25.45% | 0.01% | +25.44% |
Volatility
CBTJ vs. CSHP - Volatility Comparison
Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) has a higher volatility of 5.28% compared to iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF (CSHP) at 0.16%. This indicates that CBTJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CSHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CBTJ | CSHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.28% | 0.16% | +5.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.07% | 0.27% | +17.80% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 27.06% | 0.36% | +26.70% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 25.35% | 0.41% | +24.94% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 25.35% | 0.41% | +24.94% |
CBTJ vs. CSHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
CBTJ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than CSHP's 0.20% expense ratio.
Dividends
CBTJ vs. CSHP - Dividend Comparison
CBTJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, less than CSHP's 3.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January | 1.81% | 1.45% | 0.00% |
CSHP iShares Enhanced Short-Term Bond Active ETF | 3.92% | 5.39% | 1.96% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CBTJ and CSHP have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CBTJ has higher volatility (5.28%) compared to CSHP (0.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTJ dropped -41.69% vs CSHP's -0.08%.
On 1-year performance, CSHP leads with 3.89% vs -33.55% for CBTJ. On fees, CSHP is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, CSHP has been the lower-risk option at 0.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CSHP has performed better with a 3.89% return vs -33.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CSHP is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBTJ.
CSHP has the higher dividend yield at 3.92%, compared with 1.81% for CBTJ.
CBTJ is categorized as Blockchain, while CSHP is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBTJ and 0.20% for CSHP.
CSHP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (10.81 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.
Find the right allocation for CBTJ and CSHP
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