CBXA vs. APXM

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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 -22.76% vs 4.86% for APXM. At a 0.36 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBXA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for APXM.

Performance

CBXA vs. APXM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA) and FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBXA achieves a -21.17% return, which is significantly lower than APXM's 1.82% return.

CBXA

• 1D: -1.11%
• 1M: -5.76%
• YTD: -21.17%
• 6M: -21.33%
• 1Y: -22.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

APXM

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: -0.05%
• YTD: 1.82%
• 6M: 1.92%
• 1Y: 4.86%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CBXA vs. APXM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	-21.17%	5.80%
APXM FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April	1.82%	5.24%

Correlation

The correlation between CBXA and APXM is 0.37, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 21, 2025	0.36

Return for Risk

CBXA vs. APXM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

CBXA

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

APXM

APXM Risk / Return Rank: 97
APXM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
APXM Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
APXM Omega Ratio Rank: 98
APXM Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
APXM Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

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.

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.

	CBXA	APXM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.26	4.00	-5.26
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.72	6.46	-8.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.79	2.10	-1.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.79	8.15	-8.93
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.48	55.77	-57.25

CBXA vs. APXM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBXA Sharpe Ratio is -1.26, which is lower than the APXM Sharpe Ratio of 4.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBXA and APXM, 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

CBXA vs. APXM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBXA drawdown since its inception was -28.98%, which is greater than APXM's maximum drawdown of -0.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBXA and APXM.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBXA	APXM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-28.98%	-0.60%	-28.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.98%	-0.60%	-28.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-28.23%	-0.36%	-27.87%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.48%	-0.04%	-9.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.43%	0.09%	+15.34%

Volatility

CBXA vs. APXM - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA) has a higher volatility of 4.12% compared to FT Vest U.S. Equity Max Buffer ETF - April (APXM) at 0.76%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	CBXA	APXM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.12%	0.76%	+3.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.95%	1.06%	+13.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.12%	1.22%	+16.90%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.01%	1.36%	+15.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.01%	1.36%	+15.65%

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 2.50%, 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	2.50%	1.97%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBXA and APXM in my portfolio?

CBXA and APXM have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CBXA or APXM?

CBXA has higher volatility (4.12%) compared to APXM (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBXA dropped -28.98% vs APXM's -0.60%.

Which ETF is better, CBXA or APXM?

On 1-year performance, APXM leads with 4.86% vs -22.76% for CBXA. On fees, CBXA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, APXM has been the lower-risk option at 0.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBXA or APXM?

Over the 1-year period, APXM has performed better with a 4.86% return vs -22.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBXA or APXM?

CBXA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for APXM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CBXA or APXM?

CBXA has the higher dividend yield at 2.50%, compared with 0.00% for APXM.

What is the main difference between CBXA and APXM?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBXA and 0.85% for APXM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

APXM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.00 vs -1.26), 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.