CBTJ vs. NODE

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) and NODE (VanEck Onchain Economy ETF) are both Blockchain funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CBTJ returned -36.10% vs 32.83% for NODE. Their 0.66 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.69% expense ratio.

Performance

CBTJ vs. NODE - 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 Onchain Economy ETF (NODE). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBTJ achieves a -19.24% return, which is significantly lower than NODE's 13.76% return.

CBTJ

• 1D: 0.51%
• 1M: 0.36%
• 6M: -11.47%
• YTD: -19.24%
• 1Y: -36.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -20.05%

NODE

• 1D: 5.60%
• 1M: -1.91%
• 6M: 7.14%
• YTD: 13.76%
• 1Y: 32.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 39.75%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	$77.38K	$170.20K	$336.63K
NODE VanEck Onchain Economy ETF	$301.32K	$297.58K	$511.73K

CBTJ vs. NODE - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-19.24%	-15.35%
NODE VanEck Onchain Economy ETF	13.76%	32.27%

Correlation

The correlation between CBTJ and NODE is 0.66, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025	0.66

The correlation between CBTJ and NODE has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CBTJ vs. NODE — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CBTJ

CBTJ Risk / Return Rank: 1
CBTJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
CBTJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Omega Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBTJ Martin Ratio Rank: 3

NODE

NODE Risk / Return Rank: 27
NODE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
NODE Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
NODE Omega Ratio Rank: 28
NODE Calmar Ratio Rank: 28
NODE Martin Ratio Rank: 24

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

CBTJ vs. NODE - 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 Onchain Economy ETF (NODE). 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	NODE	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.36	0.65	-2.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.02	1.20	-3.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	1.14	-0.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.85	0.93	-1.79
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.26	1.95	-3.20

CBTJ vs. NODE - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBTJ Sharpe Ratio is -1.36, which is lower than the NODE Sharpe Ratio of 0.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBTJ and NODE, 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. NODE - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBTJ drawdown since its inception was -42.41%, which is greater than NODE's maximum drawdown of -35.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBTJ and NODE.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBTJ	NODE	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.41%	-35.35%	-7.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-42.41%	-35.35%	-7.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-41.06%	-16.71%	-24.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.88%	-11.38%	-6.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	28.74%	16.91%	+11.83%

Volatility

CBTJ vs. NODE - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) is 3.94%, while VanEck Onchain Economy ETF (NODE) has a volatility of 20.50%. This indicates that CBTJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than NODE based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBTJ	NODE	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.94%	20.50%	-16.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.95%	39.04%	-25.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	26.61%	50.77%	-24.16%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.67%	47.36%	-22.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.67%	47.36%	-22.69%

CBTJ vs. NODE - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

CBTJ vs. NODE - Dividend Comparison

CBTJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.79%, more than NODE's 0.98% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.79%	1.45%
NODE VanEck Onchain Economy ETF	0.98%	1.12%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBTJ and NODE in my portfolio?

CBTJ and NODE have a correlation of 0.66, 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 NODE?

NODE has higher volatility (20.50%) compared to CBTJ (3.94%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBTJ dropped -42.41% vs NODE's -35.35%.

Which ETF is better, CBTJ or NODE?

On 1-year performance, NODE leads with 32.83% vs -36.10% for CBTJ. Both ETFs have the same 0.69% expense ratio. On volatility, CBTJ has been the lower-risk option at 3.94%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBTJ or NODE?

Over the 1-year period, NODE has performed better with a 32.83% return vs -36.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBTJ or NODE?

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

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

CBTJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 0.98% for NODE.

What is the main difference between CBTJ and NODE?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and VanEck.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NODE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.65 vs -1.36), 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.