CPSD vs. QMAR

Last updated Apr 18, 2026

CPSD (Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December) and QMAR (FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March) are both exchange-traded funds — CPSD is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Calamos, while QMAR is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by First Trust. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CPSD returned 10.93% vs 31.30% for QMAR. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CPSD charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for QMAR.

Performance

CPSD vs. QMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December (CPSD) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CPSD achieves a 1.36% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 8.30% return.

CPSD

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 1.47%
• YTD: 1.36%
• 6M: 3.29%
• 1Y: 10.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

QMAR

• 1D: 0.49%
• 1M: 6.27%
• YTD: 8.30%
• 6M: 11.06%
• 1Y: 31.30%
• 3Y*: 17.25%
• 5Y*: 11.23%
• 10Y*: —

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

CPSD vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
CPSD Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December	1.36%	7.63%	0.04%
QMAR FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March	8.30%	10.89%	-0.03%

Correlation

The correlation between CPSD and QMAR is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 3, 2024	0.77

The correlation between CPSD and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.80 — a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CPSD vs. QMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

CPSD

CPSD Risk / Return Rank: 94
CPSD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 92
CPSD Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CPSD Omega Ratio Rank: 95
CPSD Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
CPSD Martin Ratio Rank: 96

QMAR

QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 97
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 98
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

CPSD vs. QMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December (CPSD) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). 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.

	CPSD	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	3.60	4.30	-0.70
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	5.81	7.23	-1.42
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.78	2.14	-0.36
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.06	8.92	-1.86
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	33.82	61.45	-27.64
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CPSD vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CPSD Sharpe Ratio is 3.60, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 4.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CPSD and QMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CPSD	QMAR	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.60	4.30	-0.70
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.80	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.88	0.85	+1.02

Drawdowns

CPSD vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPSD drawdown since its inception was -3.45%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPSD and QMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	CPSD	QMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.45%	-19.83%	+16.38%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.49%	-3.21%	+1.72%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.83%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.51%	-3.36%	+2.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.31%	0.47%	-0.16%

Volatility

CPSD vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December (CPSD) is 1.03%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 3.97%. This indicates that CPSD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than QMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CPSD	QMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.03%	3.97%	-2.94%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.96%	4.93%	-2.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.06%	7.35%	-4.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.54%	14.05%	-10.51%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.54%	14.00%	-10.46%

CPSD vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CPSD has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than QMAR's 0.90% expense ratio.

Dividends

CPSD vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither CPSD nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments