PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CBXJ vs. QBF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CBXJ vs. QBF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBXJ) and Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CBXJ achieves a -9.51% return, which is significantly higher than QBF's -21.94% return.


CBXJ

1D
-1.70%
1M
-5.16%
YTD
-9.51%
6M
-13.76%
1Y
-19.73%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QBF

1D
-4.78%
1M
-11.03%
YTD
-21.94%
6M
-25.72%
1Y
-33.63%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CBXJ vs. QBF - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CBXJ and QBF is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2025

0.95

The correlation between CBXJ and QBF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

CBXJ vs. QBF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CBXJ
CBXJ Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
CBXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CBXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
CBXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
CBXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
CBXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 33
Martin Ratio Rank

QBF
QBF Risk / Return Rank: 11
Overall Rank
QBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 00
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
QBF Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
QBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
QBF Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CBXJ vs. QBF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBXJ) and Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF). 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.


CBXJQBFDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-1.10

-1.28

+0.18

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-1.50

-1.88

+0.38

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.83

0.80

+0.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.72

-0.81

+0.09

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-1.16

-1.40

+0.24

CBXJ vs. QBF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CBXJ Sharpe Ratio is -1.10, which is comparable to the QBF Sharpe Ratio of -1.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CBXJ and QBF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CBXJQBFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-1.10

-1.28

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.76

-0.93

+0.16

Drawdowns

CBXJ vs. QBF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CBXJ drawdown since its inception was -27.61%, smaller than the maximum QBF drawdown of -41.65%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CBXJ and QBF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CBXJQBFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-27.61%

-41.65%

+14.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-27.61%

-41.65%

+14.04%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-27.52%

-41.65%

+14.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-10.63%

-16.74%

+6.11%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

17.01%

24.05%

-7.04%

Volatility

CBXJ vs. QBF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBXJ) is 3.03%, while Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) has a volatility of 7.29%. This indicates that CBXJ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QBF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CBXJQBFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.03%

7.29%

-4.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.44%

18.57%

-6.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.93%

26.29%

-8.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.72%

28.52%

-11.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.72%

28.52%

-11.80%

CBXJ vs. QBF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CBXJ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than QBF's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

CBXJ vs. QBF - Dividend Comparison

CBXJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.18%, more than QBF's 1.77% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.96, CBXJ and QBF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

QBF has higher volatility (7.29%) compared to CBXJ (3.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CBXJ dropped -27.61% vs QBF's -41.65%.

On 1-year performance, CBXJ leads with -19.73% vs -33.63% for QBF. On fees, CBXJ is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CBXJ has been the lower-risk option at 3.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CBXJ has performed better with a -19.73% return vs -33.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CBXJ is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBF.

CBXJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.18%, compared with 1.77% for QBF.

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Innovator. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CBXJ and 0.79% for QBF.

CBXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.10 vs -1.28), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for CBXJ and QBF

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