CBTJ vs. DAPP

Last updated Jul 16, 2026

CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) and DAPP (VanEck Digital Transformation ETF) are both Blockchain funds. CBTJ is actively managed, while DAPP is passively managed. Over the past year, CBTJ returned -36.40% vs 4.99% for DAPP. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CBTJ charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.52%/yr for DAPP.

Performance

CBTJ vs. DAPP - 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 VanEck Digital Transformation ETF (DAPP). 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 DAPP's 12.10% return.

CBTJ

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

DAPP

• 1D: 1.48%
• 1M: -16.12%
• 6M: -9.52%
• YTD: 12.10%
• 1Y: 4.99%
• 3Y*: 28.46%
• 5Y*: 0.06%
• 10Y*: —

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

CBTJ vs. DAPP - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-18.01%	-11.32%
DAPP VanEck Digital Transformation ETF	12.10%	9.18%

Correlation

The correlation between CBTJ and DAPP is 0.68, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2025	0.68

The correlation between CBTJ and DAPP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CBTJ vs. DAPP — 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

DAPP

DAPP Risk / Return Rank: 12
DAPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 10
DAPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
DAPP Omega Ratio Rank: 13
DAPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 10
DAPP Martin Ratio Rank: 10

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. DAPP - 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 VanEck Digital Transformation ETF (DAPP). 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	DAPP	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.37	0.08	-1.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.03	0.56	-2.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.77	1.06	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.86	0.10	-0.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.34	0.19	-1.53

CBTJ vs. DAPP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBTJ Sharpe Ratio is -1.37, which is lower than the DAPP Sharpe Ratio of 0.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBTJ and DAPP, 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. DAPP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -42.41%, smaller than the maximum DAPP drawdown of -92.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTJ and DAPP.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBTJ	DAPP	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.41%	-92.61%	+50.20%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-42.41%	-48.21%	+5.80%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-58.88%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-91.90%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-40.16%	-43.94%	+3.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.07%	-60.93%	+43.86%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	27.24%	25.93%	+1.31%

Volatility

CBTJ vs. DAPP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) is 4.65%, while VanEck Digital Transformation ETF (DAPP) has a volatility of 13.91%. This indicates that CBTJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than DAPP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBTJ	DAPP	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.65%	13.91%	-9.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	17.27%	45.84%	-28.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.73%	62.36%	-35.63%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	25.01%	73.15%	-48.14%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.01%	72.57%	-47.56%

CBTJ vs. DAPP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBTJ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than DAPP's 0.52% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBTJ vs. DAPP - Dividend Comparison

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

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.77%	1.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
DAPP VanEck Digital Transformation ETF	0.00%	0.00%	4.04%	0.00%	0.00%	10.13%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBTJ and DAPP in my portfolio?

CBTJ and DAPP have a correlation of 0.68, 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 DAPP?

DAPP has higher volatility (13.91%) compared to CBTJ (4.65%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTJ dropped -42.41% vs DAPP's -92.61%.

Which ETF is better, CBTJ or DAPP?

On 1-year performance, DAPP leads with 4.99% vs -36.40% for CBTJ. On fees, DAPP is cheaper at 0.52% 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 DAPP?

Over the 1-year period, DAPP has performed better with a 4.99% 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 DAPP?

DAPP is cheaper with a 0.52% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBTJ.

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

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

What is the main difference between CBTJ and DAPP?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBTJ and 0.52% for DAPP.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

DAPP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.08 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.