CCEF vs. PG
CCEF (Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF) is Dividend fund actively managed by Calamos, while PG (The Procter & Gamble Company) is a stock. Over the past year, CCEF returned 12.87% vs -1.27% for PG. Their 0.10 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.
Performance
CCEF vs. PG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CCEF achieves a 6.53% return, which is significantly higher than PG's 3.07% return.
CCEF
- 1D
- 0.34%
- 1M
- -0.32%
- 6M
- 3.30%
- YTD
- 6.53%
- 1Y
- 12.87%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 14.94%
PG
- 1D
- 0.37%
- 1M
- -3.86%
- 6M
- -3.36%
- YTD
- 3.07%
- 1Y
- -1.27%
- 3Y*
- 0.02%
- 5Y*
- 2.93%
- 10Y*
- 8.14%
- ALL TIME*
- 10.08%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $74.18K | $103.33K | $101.25K | |
| $1.25B | $1.28B | $1.30B |
CCEF vs. PG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
CCEF Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF | 6.53% | 13.47% | 17.80% |
PG The Procter & Gamble Company | 3.07% | -12.26% | 14.09% |
Correlation
The correlation between CCEF and PG is 0.01, 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. | 0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2024 | 0.10 |
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
CCEF vs. PG — Risk / Return Rank
CCEF
PG
CCEF vs. PG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF (CCEF) and The Procter & Gamble Company (PG). 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 | PG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.51 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.99 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.01 | +0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.58 | -0.07 | +1.65 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.74 | -0.13 | +6.87 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CCEF vs. PG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CCEF drawdown since its inception was -13.25%, smaller than the maximum PG drawdown of -54.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CCEF and PG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CCEF | PG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.25% | -54.25% | +41.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.75% | -15.52% | +7.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -21.15% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.77% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -23.77% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.86% | -15.63% | +14.77% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.32% | -12.17% | +10.85% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.81% | 9.06% | -7.25% |
Volatility
CCEF vs. PG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF (CCEF) is 2.06%, while The Procter & Gamble Company (PG) has a volatility of 6.95%. This indicates that CCEF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CCEF | PG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.06% | 6.95% | -4.89% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.14% | 15.72% | -8.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 8.41% | 19.64% | -11.23% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.66% | 18.08% | -7.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.66% | 19.18% | -8.52% |
Dividends
CCEF vs. PG - Dividend Comparison
CCEF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.01%, more than PG's 2.97% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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% | 0.00% |
PG The Procter & Gamble Company | 2.97% | 2.91% | 2.36% | 2.55% | 2.38% | 2.08% | 2.24% | 2.37% | 3.09% | 2.98% | 3.18% | 3.31% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CCEF and PG have a correlation of 0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PG has higher volatility (6.95%) compared to CCEF (2.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CCEF dropped -13.25% vs PG's -54.25%.
CCEF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.45 vs -0.06), 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 CCEF and PG
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