CCD vs. MLPX

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

CCD (Calamos Dynamic Convertible and Income Fund) is a stock, while MLPX (Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF) is Infrastructure Equities fund tracking the Solactive MLP & Energy Infrastructure Index. Over the past 10 years, CCD returned 13.45%/yr vs 11.93%/yr for MLPX. Their 0.34 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.

Performance

CCD vs. MLPX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Dynamic Convertible and Income Fund (CCD) and Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CCD achieves a 27.85% return, which is significantly higher than MLPX's 25.38% return. Over the past 10 years, CCD has outperformed MLPX with an annualized return of 13.45%, while MLPX has yielded a comparatively lower 11.93% annualized return.

CCD

• 1D: 2.63%
• 1M: 0.53%
• 6M: 18.22%
• YTD: 27.85%
• 1Y: 37.99%
• 3Y*: 18.92%
• 5Y*: 6.15%
• 10Y*: 13.45%
• ALL TIME*: 10.41%

MLPX

• 1D: -1.08%
• 1M: 1.80%
• 6M: 17.55%
• YTD: 25.38%
• 1Y: 25.50%
• 3Y*: 26.11%
• 5Y*: 22.95%
• 10Y*: 11.93%
• ALL TIME*: 9.25%

*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)
CCD Calamos Dynamic Convertible and Income Fund	$1.56M	$1.82M	$2.03M
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	$36.35M	$37.38M	$31.63M

CCD vs. MLPX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CCD Calamos Dynamic Convertible and Income Fund	27.85%	-4.26%	35.89%	7.98%	-28.00%	20.33%	45.75%	41.60%	-9.64%	26.56%
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	25.38%	4.96%	42.90%	15.77%	21.54%	39.63%	-20.32%	19.04%	-15.64%	-4.53%

Correlation

The correlation between CCD and MLPX is -0.09, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.09
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.19
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.29
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.32
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 27, 2015	0.34

The correlation between CCD and MLPX shifts across timeframes, from -0.09 (1 year) to 0.34 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

CCD vs. MLPX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CCD

CCD Risk / Return Rank: 90
CCD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
CCD Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
CCD Omega Ratio Rank: 87
CCD Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
CCD Martin Ratio Rank: 95

MLPX

MLPX Risk / Return Rank: 69
MLPX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
MLPX Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
MLPX Omega Ratio Rank: 64
MLPX Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
MLPX Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

CCD vs. MLPX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Dynamic Convertible and Income Fund (CCD) and Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX). 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.

	CCD	MLPX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.94	1.63	+0.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.63	2.32	+0.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.28	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.45	3.13	+0.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.27	7.30	+6.98

CCD vs. MLPX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CCD Sharpe Ratio is 1.94, which is comparable to the MLPX Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CCD and MLPX, 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

CCD vs. MLPX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCD drawdown since its inception was -55.42%, smaller than the maximum MLPX drawdown of -70.67%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCD and MLPX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CCD	MLPX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.42%	-70.67%	+15.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.08%	-8.18%	-2.90%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-22.28%	-16.77%	-5.51%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.54%	-19.72%	-17.82%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-55.42%	-64.70%	+9.28%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.30%	-4.32%	+3.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.69%	-16.47%	+4.78%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.67%	3.50%	-0.83%

Volatility

CCD vs. MLPX - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Dynamic Convertible and Income Fund (CCD) has a higher volatility of 7.06% compared to Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF (MLPX) at 5.58%. This indicates that CCD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MLPX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CCD	MLPX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.06%	5.58%	+1.48%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	16.49%	12.57%	+3.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	19.71%	15.73%	+3.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.55%	19.90%	+0.65%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	25.89%	26.13%	-0.24%

Dividends

CCD vs. MLPX - Dividend Comparison

CCD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.22%, more than MLPX's 4.09% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CCD Calamos Dynamic Convertible and Income Fund	9.22%	11.22%	9.63%	11.83%	11.42%	7.43%	7.11%	8.93%	12.21%	9.99%	11.43%	7.40%
MLPX Global X MLP & Energy Infrastructure ETF	4.09%	4.88%	4.30%	5.22%	5.23%	5.98%	8.32%	5.78%	5.77%	4.36%	5.50%	4.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CCD and MLPX in my portfolio?

CCD and MLPX have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CCD or MLPX?

CCD has higher volatility (7.06%) compared to MLPX (5.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CCD dropped -55.42% vs MLPX's -70.67%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CCD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.94 vs 1.63), 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.