CPSF vs. CANQ
CPSF (Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February) and CANQ (Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CPSF is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Calamos, while CANQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Calamos. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, CPSF returned 7.72% vs 17.89% for CANQ. A 0.80 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CPSF charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.90%/yr for CANQ.
Performance
CPSF vs. CANQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CPSF achieves a 2.27% return, which is significantly lower than CANQ's 7.60% return.
CPSF
- 1D
- -0.19%
- 1M
- 0.56%
- YTD
- 2.27%
- 6M
- 2.93%
- 1Y
- 7.72%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CANQ
- 1D
- -0.37%
- 1M
- 5.62%
- YTD
- 7.60%
- 6M
- 5.52%
- 1Y
- 17.89%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CPSF vs. CANQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
CPSF Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February | 2.27% | 6.18% |
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF | 7.60% | 9.99% |
Correlation
The correlation between CPSF and CANQ is 0.79, 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 | 0.79 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2025 | 0.80 |
The correlation between CPSF and CANQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.79 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.
CPSF vs. CANQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
CPSF
CANQ
Technology
-
Financial Services
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Energy
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Basic Materials
-
Technology
CPSF
CANQ
-
Financial Services
CPSF
CANQ
Communication Services
CPSF
CANQ
-
Consumer Cyclical
CPSF
CANQ
-
Healthcare
CPSF
CANQ
-
Industrials
CPSF
CANQ
-
Consumer Defensive
CPSF
CANQ
-
Energy
CPSF
CANQ
-
Utilities
CPSF
CANQ
-
Real Estate
CPSF
CANQ
-
Basic Materials
CPSF
CANQ
-
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
CPSF vs. CANQ — Risk / Return Rank
CPSF
CANQ
CPSF vs. CANQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February (CPSF) and Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ). 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.
| CPSF | CANQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.05 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.82 | 1.30 | +0.53 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.97 | 1.67 | +4.30 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 29.19 | 5.17 | +24.02 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CPSF | CANQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.73 | 1.67 | +2.05 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 2.28 | 1.35 | +0.93 |
Drawdowns
CPSF vs. CANQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CPSF drawdown since its inception was -2.89%, smaller than the maximum CANQ drawdown of -12.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPSF and CANQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CPSF | CANQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.89% | -12.79% | +9.90% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.30% | -10.77% | +9.47% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.19% | -0.37% | +0.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.35% | -2.95% | +2.60% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.26% | 3.47% | -3.21% |
Volatility
CPSF vs. CANQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February (CPSF) is 0.43%, while Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF (CANQ) has a volatility of 3.86%. This indicates that CPSF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CANQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CPSF | CANQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.43% | 3.86% | -3.43% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 1.40% | 7.52% | -6.12% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.09% | 10.76% | -8.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.82% | 12.69% | -9.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.82% | 12.69% | -9.87% |
CPSF vs. CANQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
CPSF has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than CANQ's 0.90% expense ratio.
Dividends
CPSF vs. CANQ - Dividend Comparison
CPSF has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CANQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.36%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
CANQ Calamos Alternative Nasdaq & Bond ETF | 4.36% | 5.02% | 4.19% |
CPSF Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - February | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CPSF and CANQ have a correlation of 0.79, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CANQ has higher volatility (3.86%) compared to CPSF (0.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CPSF dropped -2.89% vs CANQ's -12.79%.
On 1-year performance, CANQ leads with 17.89% vs 7.72% for CPSF. On fees, CPSF is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CPSF has been the lower-risk option at 0.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CANQ has performed better with a 17.89% return vs 7.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CPSF is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for CANQ.
CANQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.36%, compared with 0.00% for CPSF.
CPSF is categorized as Defined Outcome, while CANQ is Nasdaq-100. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CPSF and 0.90% for CANQ.
CPSF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.73 vs 1.67), 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 CPSF and CANQ
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