PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CHW vs. TZINX
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CHW vs. TZINX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW) and Templeton Global Balanced Fund (TZINX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CHW achieves a 16.29% return, which is significantly higher than TZINX's 13.27% return. Over the past 10 years, CHW has outperformed TZINX with an annualized return of 11.54%, while TZINX has yielded a comparatively lower 5.30% annualized return.


CHW

1D
1.34%
1M
-4.60%
6M
7.58%
YTD
16.29%
1Y
26.53%
3Y*
20.54%
5Y*
3.45%
10Y*
11.54%
ALL TIME*
6.89%

TZINX

1D
0.31%
1M
2.99%
6M
7.96%
YTD
13.27%
1Y
26.88%
3Y*
14.13%
5Y*
6.50%
10Y*
5.30%
ALL TIME*
5.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$2.39M$2.48M$2.03M
$0.00$0.00$0.00

CHW vs. TZINX - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CHW
Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund
16.29%19.55%27.82%14.55%-37.74%13.07%22.28%47.12%-20.33%43.78%
TZINX
Templeton Global Balanced Fund
13.27%27.85%0.73%14.45%-14.31%-1.44%1.70%7.58%-9.18%12.42%

Correlation

The correlation between CHW and TZINX is 0.51, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.51

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.56

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.65

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 2007

0.61

The correlation between CHW and TZINX shifts across timeframes, from 0.51 (1 year) to 0.65 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

CHW vs. TZINX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CHW
CHW Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
CHW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CHW Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
CHW Omega Ratio Rank: 5151
Omega Ratio Rank
CHW Calmar Ratio Rank: 3737
Calmar Ratio Rank
CHW Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
Martin Ratio Rank

TZINX
TZINX Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
TZINX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
TZINX Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
TZINX Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
TZINX Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
TZINX Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CHW vs. TZINX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW) and Templeton Global Balanced Fund (TZINX). 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.


CHWTZINXDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.98

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.26

1.45

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.62

3.04

-1.42

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.65

11.54

-5.90

CHW vs. TZINX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CHW Sharpe Ratio is 1.44, which is lower than the TZINX Sharpe Ratio of 2.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CHW and TZINX, 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...

Drawdowns

CHW vs. TZINX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CHW drawdown since its inception was -66.94%, which is greater than TZINX's maximum drawdown of -36.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CHW and TZINX.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CHWTZINXDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-66.94%

-36.06%

-30.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.51%

-8.42%

-7.09%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-20.40%

-9.73%

-10.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-45.48%

-27.83%

-17.65%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-53.58%

-29.60%

-23.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-8.14%

0.00%

-8.14%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-14.79%

-7.43%

-7.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.43%

2.21%

+2.22%

Volatility

CHW vs. TZINX - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW) has a higher volatility of 5.13% compared to Templeton Global Balanced Fund (TZINX) at 2.82%. This indicates that CHW's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TZINX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CHWTZINXDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.13%

2.82%

+2.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.11%

8.80%

+6.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.41%

10.61%

+6.80%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.17%

11.92%

+7.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.32%

11.07%

+11.25%

CHW vs. TZINX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CHW has a 2.63% expense ratio, which is higher than TZINX's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

CHW vs. TZINX - Dividend Comparison

CHW's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.35%, more than TZINX's 5.08% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CHW
Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund
7.35%8.10%8.89%10.40%13.62%8.43%8.79%9.67%12.82%9.25%12.05%11.73%
TZINX
Templeton Global Balanced Fund
5.08%4.00%5.43%3.68%3.47%2.24%2.12%4.43%4.55%2.82%1.12%7.19%

Frequently Asked Questions


CHW and TZINX have a correlation of 0.51, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CHW has higher volatility (5.13%) compared to TZINX (2.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CHW dropped -66.94% vs TZINX's -36.06%.

TZINX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.42 vs 1.44), 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 CHW and TZINX

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