CBXA vs. PMFB

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

CBXA (Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) and PMFB (PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February) are both Defined Outcome funds. CBXA is passively managed, while PMFB is actively managed. Over the past year, CBXA returned -25.28% vs 7.01% for PMFB. Their 0.42 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CBXA charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for PMFB.

Performance

CBXA vs. PMFB - 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 PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBXA achieves a -20.83% return, which is significantly lower than PMFB's 3.18% return.

CBXA

• 1D: -1.08%
• 1M: 0.89%
• 6M: -18.90%
• YTD: -20.83%
• 1Y: -25.28%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -10.19%

PMFB

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.49%
• 6M: 2.56%
• YTD: 3.18%
• 1Y: 7.01%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.47%

*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)
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	$43.82K	$66.75K	$66.82K
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February	$4.97K	$5.27K	$4.08K

CBXA vs. PMFB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	-20.83%	9.67%
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February	3.18%	8.78%

Correlation

The correlation between CBXA and PMFB is 0.43, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.43
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025	0.42

Return for Risk

CBXA vs. PMFB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks 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: 0
CBXA Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBXA Martin Ratio Rank: 1

PMFB

PMFB Risk / Return Rank: 96
PMFB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Omega Ratio Rank: 97
PMFB Calmar Ratio Rank: 94
PMFB Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

CBXA vs. PMFB - 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 PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB). 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	PMFB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.43	3.18	-4.61
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.00	4.90	-6.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.76	1.68	-0.93
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.88	5.00	-5.88
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.45	25.30	-26.75

CBXA vs. PMFB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBXA Sharpe Ratio is -1.43, which is lower than the PMFB Sharpe Ratio of 3.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBXA and PMFB, 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. PMFB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBXA drawdown since its inception was -29.68%, which is greater than PMFB's maximum drawdown of -2.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBXA and PMFB.

Drawdown Indicators

	CBXA	PMFB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.68%	-2.94%	-26.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.68%	-1.34%	-28.34%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-27.92%	0.00%	-27.92%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.99%	-0.35%	-10.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.94%	0.27%	+17.67%

Volatility

CBXA vs. PMFB - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CBXA) has a higher volatility of 3.14% compared to PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February (PMFB) at 0.50%. This indicates that CBXA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PMFB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CBXA	PMFB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.14%	0.50%	+2.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.27%	1.59%	+11.68%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.25%	2.11%	+16.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.59%	2.69%	+13.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.59%	2.69%	+13.90%

CBXA vs. PMFB - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBXA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than PMFB's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

CBXA vs. PMFB - Dividend Comparison

CBXA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.49%, while PMFB has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
CBXA Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	2.49%	1.97%
PMFB PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - February	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CBXA and PMFB in my portfolio?

CBXA and PMFB have a correlation of 0.43, 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 PMFB?

CBXA has higher volatility (3.14%) compared to PMFB (0.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBXA dropped -29.68% vs PMFB's -2.94%.

Which ETF is better, CBXA or PMFB?

On 1-year performance, PMFB leads with 7.01% vs -25.28% for CBXA. On fees, PMFB is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMFB has been the lower-risk option at 0.50%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CBXA or PMFB?

Over the 1-year period, PMFB has performed better with a 7.01% return vs -25.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CBXA or PMFB?

PMFB is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBXA.

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

CBXA has the higher dividend yield at 2.49%, compared with 0.00% for PMFB.

What is the main difference between CBXA and PMFB?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBXA and 0.50% for PMFB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PMFB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.18 vs -1.43), 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.