CCEF vs. LVHD

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

CCEF (Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF) and LVHD (Franklin U.S. Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF) are both Dividend funds. CCEF is actively managed, while LVHD is passively managed. Over the past year, CCEF returned 12.87% vs 14.84% for LVHD. Their 0.42 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. CCEF charges 2.74%/yr vs 0.27%/yr for LVHD.

Performance

CCEF vs. LVHD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF (CCEF) and Franklin U.S. Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (LVHD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CCEF achieves a 6.53% return, which is significantly lower than LVHD's 13.58% return.

CCEF

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: -0.32%
• 6M: 3.30%
• YTD: 6.53%
• 1Y: 12.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.94%

LVHD

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: -0.55%
• 6M: 7.65%
• YTD: 13.58%
• 1Y: 14.84%
• 3Y*: 9.83%
• 5Y*: 7.39%
• 10Y*: 8.26%
• ALL TIME*: 9.16%

*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)
CCEF Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF	$74.18K	$103.33K	$101.25K
LVHD Franklin U.S. Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF	$2.24M	$2.50M	$2.89M

CCEF vs. LVHD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CCEF Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF	6.53%	13.47%	17.80%
LVHD Franklin U.S. Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF	13.58%	7.50%	10.73%

Correlation

The correlation between CCEF and LVHD is 0.20, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.20
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2024	0.42

Over the past year, the correlation between CCEF and LVHD has dropped to 0.20 - well below their long-term average of 0.42, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

CCEF vs. LVHD — Risk / Return Rank

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

CCEF

CCEF Risk / Return Rank: 57
CCEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
CCEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
CCEF Omega Ratio Rank: 63
CCEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
CCEF Martin Ratio Rank: 57

LVHD

LVHD Risk / Return Rank: 61
LVHD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
LVHD Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
LVHD Omega Ratio Rank: 56
LVHD Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
LVHD Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

CCEF vs. LVHD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF (CCEF) and Franklin U.S. Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (LVHD). 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.

	CCEF	LVHD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.45	1.41	+0.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.04	2.13	-0.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.25	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.58	2.41	-0.83
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.74	5.96	+0.78

CCEF vs. LVHD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CCEF Sharpe Ratio is 1.45, which is comparable to the LVHD Sharpe Ratio of 1.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CCEF and LVHD, 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

CCEF vs. LVHD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CCEF drawdown since its inception was -13.25%, smaller than the maximum LVHD drawdown of -37.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCEF and LVHD.

Drawdown Indicators

	CCEF	LVHD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.25%	-37.32%	+24.07%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.75%	-6.17%	-1.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.94%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-16.75%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.32%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.86%	-2.12%	+1.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.32%	-4.00%	+2.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.81%	2.49%	-0.68%

Volatility

CCEF vs. LVHD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF (CCEF) is 2.06%, while Franklin U.S. Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF (LVHD) has a volatility of 4.75%. This indicates that CCEF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than LVHD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CCEF	LVHD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.06%	4.75%	-2.69%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.14%	8.37%	-1.23%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.41%	10.54%	-2.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.66%	13.05%	-2.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.66%	15.57%	-4.91%

CCEF vs. LVHD - Expense Ratio Comparison

CCEF has a 2.74% expense ratio, which is higher than LVHD's 0.27% expense ratio.

Dividends

CCEF vs. LVHD - Dividend Comparison

CCEF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.01%, more than LVHD's 3.20% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CCEF Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF	7.36%	8.08%	6.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LVHD Franklin U.S. Low Volatility High Dividend Index ETF	3.20%	3.35%	4.23%	3.55%	3.30%	2.56%	3.27%	3.30%	3.82%	3.33%	2.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CCEF and LVHD in my portfolio?

CCEF and LVHD have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CCEF or LVHD?

LVHD has higher volatility (4.75%) compared to CCEF (2.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CCEF dropped -13.25% vs LVHD's -37.32%.

Which ETF is better, CCEF or LVHD?

On 1-year performance, LVHD leads with 14.84% vs 12.87% for CCEF. On fees, LVHD is cheaper at 0.27% per year. On volatility, CCEF has been the lower-risk option at 2.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CCEF or LVHD?

Over the 1-year period, LVHD has performed better with a 14.84% return vs 12.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CCEF or LVHD?

LVHD is cheaper with a 0.27% expense ratio, compared with 2.74% for CCEF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CCEF or LVHD?

CCEF has the higher dividend yield at 7.36%, compared with 3.20% for LVHD.

What is the main difference between CCEF and LVHD?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 2.74% for CCEF and 0.27% for LVHD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CCEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.45 vs 1.41), 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.