CBXA vs. APXM
CBXA (Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) and APXM (FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. CBXA is passively managed, while APXM is actively managed. Over the past year, CBXA returned -21.42% vs 5.49% for APXM. At a 0.35 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBXA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for APXM.
Performance
CBXA vs. APXM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CBXA achieves a -20.06% return, which is significantly lower than APXM's 2.11% return.
CBXA
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- -5.65%
- YTD
- -20.06%
- 6M
- -21.86%
- 1Y
- -21.42%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
APXM
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.79%
- YTD
- 2.11%
- 6M
- 2.59%
- 1Y
- 5.49%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CBXA vs. APXM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | -20.06% | 5.18% |
APXM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April | 2.11% | 5.40% |
Correlation
The correlation between CBXA and APXM is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.36 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 22, 2025 | 0.35 |
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
CBXA vs. APXM — Risk / Return Rank
CBXA
APXM
CBXA vs. APXM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM). 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.
| CBXA | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -6.67 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -12.17 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.80 | 2.60 | -1.80 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.79 | 20.36 | -21.15 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.52 | 110.99 | -112.51 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CBXA | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.20 | 5.47 | -6.67 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.63 | 5.70 | -6.33 |
Drawdowns
CBXA vs. APXM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CBXA drawdown since its inception was -27.22%, which is greater than APXM's maximum drawdown of -0.40%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBXA and APXM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CBXA | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.22% | -0.40% | -26.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.22% | -0.27% | -26.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.22% | -0.06% | -27.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.69% | -0.03% | -8.66% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 14.07% | 0.05% | +14.02% |
Volatility
CBXA vs. APXM - Volatility Comparison
Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA) has a higher volatility of 2.81% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM) at 0.42%. This indicates that CBXA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than APXM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CBXA | APXM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.81% | 0.42% | +2.39% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.53% | 0.78% | +14.75% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.98% | 1.01% | +16.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.13% | 1.20% | +15.93% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.13% | 1.20% | +15.93% |
CBXA vs. APXM - Expense Ratio Comparison
CBXA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than APXM's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
CBXA vs. APXM - Dividend Comparison
CBXA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, while APXM has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
APXM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | 2.47% | 1.97% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CBXA and APXM have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CBXA has higher volatility (2.81%) compared to APXM (0.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBXA dropped -27.22% vs APXM's -0.40%.
On 1-year performance, APXM leads with 5.49% vs -21.42% for CBXA. On fees, CBXA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, APXM has been the lower-risk option at 0.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, APXM has performed better with a 5.49% return vs -21.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CBXA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for APXM.
CBXA has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 0.00% for APXM.
They also come from different issuers: Calamos and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBXA and 0.85% for APXM.
APXM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.47 vs -1.20), 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 CBXA and APXM
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