CBXA vs. EAPR
CBXA (Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) and EAPR (Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds - CBXA tracks the CBOE Bitcoin US ETF Index while EAPR tracks the MSCI Emerging Markets. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, CBXA returned -21.42% vs 22.07% for EAPR. At a 0.30 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CBXA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.89%/yr for EAPR.
Performance
CBXA vs. EAPR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CBXA achieves a -20.06% return, which is significantly lower than EAPR's 11.39% return.
CBXA
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- -5.65%
- YTD
- -20.06%
- 6M
- -21.86%
- 1Y
- -21.42%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EAPR
- 1D
- -0.45%
- 1M
- 2.01%
- YTD
- 11.39%
- 6M
- 12.25%
- 1Y
- 22.07%
- 3Y*
- 10.62%
- 5Y*
- 5.15%
- 10Y*
- —
CBXA vs. EAPR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | -20.06% | 9.67% |
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April | 11.39% | 19.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between CBXA and EAPR is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2025 | 0.30 |
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. EAPR — Risk / Return Rank
CBXA
EAPR
CBXA vs. EAPR - 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 Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR). 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 | EAPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.26 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.80 | 1.84 | -1.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.79 | 7.33 | -8.12 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.52 | 42.15 | -43.67 |
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 | EAPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.20 | 3.06 | -4.26 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.51 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.63 | 0.54 | -1.18 |
Drawdowns
CBXA vs. EAPR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CBXA drawdown since its inception was -27.22%, which is greater than EAPR's maximum drawdown of -17.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBXA and EAPR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CBXA | EAPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -27.22% | -17.65% | -9.57% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -27.22% | -3.02% | -24.20% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -10.24% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -17.65% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -27.22% | -0.45% | -26.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.69% | -4.06% | -4.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 14.07% | 0.52% | +13.55% |
Volatility
CBXA vs. EAPR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA) is 2.81%, while Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April (EAPR) has a volatility of 3.79%. This indicates that CBXA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EAPR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CBXA | EAPR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.81% | 3.79% | -0.98% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.53% | 6.28% | +9.25% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.98% | 7.24% | +10.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.13% | 10.09% | +7.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.13% | 10.02% | +7.11% |
CBXA vs. EAPR - Expense Ratio Comparison
CBXA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than EAPR's 0.89% expense ratio.
Dividends
CBXA vs. EAPR - Dividend Comparison
CBXA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, while EAPR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April | 2.47% | 1.97% |
EAPR Innovator Emerging Markets Power Buffer ETF - April | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CBXA and EAPR have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EAPR has higher volatility (3.79%) compared to CBXA (2.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBXA dropped -27.22% vs EAPR's -17.65%.
On 1-year performance, EAPR leads with 22.07% vs -21.42% for CBXA. On fees, CBXA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CBXA has been the lower-risk option at 2.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, EAPR has performed better with a 22.07% 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 0.89% for EAPR.
CBXA has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 0.00% for EAPR.
CBXA tracks CBOE Bitcoin US ETF Index, while EAPR tracks MSCI Emerging Markets. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBXA and 0.89% for EAPR.
EAPR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.06 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 EAPR
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