CPSL vs. TMAR

Last updated Jun 18, 2026

CPSL (Calamos Laddered S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF) and TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) are both Defined Outcome funds. CPSL is actively managed, while TMAR is passively managed. Over the past year, CPSL returned 7.09% vs 26.62% for TMAR. At a 0.49 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CPSL charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for TMAR.

Performance

CPSL vs. TMAR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Laddered S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF (CPSL) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CPSL achieves a 2.60% return, which is significantly lower than TMAR's 13.83% return.

CPSL

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 0.28%
• YTD: 2.60%
• 6M: 2.97%
• 1Y: 7.09%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TMAR

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 1.78%
• YTD: 13.83%
• 6M: 15.70%
• 1Y: 26.62%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

CPSL vs. TMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
CPSL Calamos Laddered S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF	2.60%	6.79%
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	13.83%	15.97%

Correlation

The correlation between CPSL and TMAR is 0.51, 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	0.51
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025	0.49

The correlation between CPSL and TMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.49 to 0.51 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

CPSL vs. TMAR — Risk / Return Rank

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

CPSL

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

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 91
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 86
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 94
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

CPSL vs. TMAR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Laddered S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF (CPSL) and FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR). 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.

	CPSL	TMAR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.19	2.55	+0.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	5.17	3.71	+1.46
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.64	1.64	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.04	5.70	+0.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	30.53	28.52	+2.01

CPSL vs. TMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CPSL Sharpe Ratio is 3.19, which is comparable to the TMAR Sharpe Ratio of 2.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CPSL and TMAR, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

CPSL vs. TMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPSL drawdown since its inception was -3.72%, smaller than the maximum TMAR drawdown of -9.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPSL and TMAR.

Drawdown Indicators

	CPSL	TMAR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.72%	-9.93%	+6.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.18%	-4.69%	+3.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.21%	-1.26%	+1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.33%	-0.72%	+0.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.23%	0.94%	-0.71%

Volatility

CPSL vs. TMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos Laddered S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF (CPSL) is 0.55%, while FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a volatility of 5.47%. This indicates that CPSL experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than TMAR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CPSL	TMAR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.55%	5.47%	-4.92%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.63%	9.48%	-7.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.24%	10.51%	-8.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	3.32%	12.05%	-8.73%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	3.32%	12.05%	-8.73%

CPSL vs. TMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

CPSL has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is lower than TMAR's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

CPSL vs. TMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither CPSL nor TMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CPSL and TMAR in my portfolio?

CPSL and TMAR 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.

Which is riskier, CPSL or TMAR?

TMAR has higher volatility (5.47%) compared to CPSL (0.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CPSL dropped -3.72% vs TMAR's -9.93%.

Which ETF is better, CPSL or TMAR?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 26.62% vs 7.09% for CPSL. On fees, CPSL is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, CPSL has been the lower-risk option at 0.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CPSL or TMAR?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 26.62% return vs 7.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CPSL or TMAR?

CPSL is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CPSL or TMAR?

CPSL and TMAR have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between CPSL and TMAR?

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for CPSL and 0.95% for TMAR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CPSL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.19 vs 2.55), 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.