CPNQ vs. PRXV

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

CPNQ (Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December) and PRXV (Praxis Impact Large Cap Value ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CPNQ is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Calamos, while PRXV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Praxis. Both are actively managed. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CPNQ charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.36%/yr for PRXV.

Performance

CPNQ vs. PRXV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December (CPNQ) and Praxis Impact Large Cap Value ETF (PRXV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

CPNQ

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 3.07%
• 6M: 3.17%
• 1Y: 8.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

PRXV

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: 3.80%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CPNQ vs. PRXV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
CPNQ Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December	1.60%
PRXV Praxis Impact Large Cap Value ETF	6.85%

Correlation

The correlation between CPNQ and PRXV is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 20, 2026	0.41

Return for Risk

CPNQ vs. PRXV — Risk / Return Rank

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

CPNQ

CPNQ Risk / Return Rank: 94
CPNQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CPNQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CPNQ Omega Ratio Rank: 94
CPNQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
CPNQ Martin Ratio Rank: 95

PRXV

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

CPNQ vs. PRXV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December (CPNQ) and Praxis Impact Large Cap Value ETF (PRXV). 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.

	CPNQ	PRXV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.19	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.23	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.68	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.72	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	27.62	—	—

Drawdowns

CPNQ vs. PRXV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPNQ drawdown since its inception was -3.52%, which is greater than PRXV's maximum drawdown of -1.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPNQ and PRXV.

Drawdown Indicators

	CPNQ	PRXV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.52%	-1.41%	-2.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.52%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.15%	0.00%	-0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.42%	-0.41%	-0.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.31%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	CPNQ	PRXV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.90%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.23%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.72%	10.71%	-7.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.38%	10.71%	-7.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.38%	10.71%	-7.33%

CPNQ vs. PRXV - Expense Ratio Comparison

CPNQ has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than PRXV's 0.36% expense ratio.

Dividends

CPNQ vs. PRXV - Dividend Comparison

Neither CPNQ nor PRXV has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CPNQ and PRXV in my portfolio?

CPNQ and PRXV have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, CPNQ or PRXV?

On fees, PRXV is cheaper at 0.36% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, CPNQ or PRXV?

PRXV is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CPNQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CPNQ or PRXV?

CPNQ and PRXV have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between CPNQ and PRXV?

CPNQ is categorized as Defined Outcome, while PRXV is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and Praxis. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CPNQ and 0.36% for PRXV.