PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CPST vs. PMAP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CPST vs. PMAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPST) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CPST achieves a 2.67% return, which is significantly lower than PMAP's 3.34% return.


CPST

1D
0.07%
1M
0.82%
YTD
2.67%
6M
3.20%
1Y
7.84%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

PMAP

1D
0.04%
1M
0.50%
YTD
3.34%
6M
3.93%
1Y
7.53%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CPST vs. PMAP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CPST and PMAP is 0.76, 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

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 2, 2025

0.76

The correlation between CPST and PMAP has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

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

CPST vs. PMAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

CPST
CPST Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
CPST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CPST Sortino Ratio Rank: 9797
Sortino Ratio Rank
CPST Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
CPST Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
CPST Martin Ratio Rank: 9595
Martin Ratio Rank

PMAP
PMAP Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
PMAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
PMAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

CPST vs. PMAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPST) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP). 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.


CPSTPMAPDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.66

6.59

-2.93

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

6.09

13.80

-7.71

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.84

3.00

-1.15

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

5.58

21.97

-16.39

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

30.14

138.08

-107.94

CPST vs. PMAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CPST Sharpe Ratio is 3.66, which is lower than the PMAP Sharpe Ratio of 6.59. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CPST and PMAP, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CPSTPMAPDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.66

6.59

-2.93

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

2.02

3.26

-1.24

Drawdowns

CPST vs. PMAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPST drawdown since its inception was -3.79%, which is greater than PMAP's maximum drawdown of -1.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPST and PMAP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CPSTPMAPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.79%

-1.75%

-2.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.42%

-0.34%

-1.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.35%

-0.08%

-0.27%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.26%

0.05%

+0.21%

Volatility

CPST vs. PMAP - Volatility Comparison

Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPST) and PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) have volatilities of 0.32% and 0.31%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CPSTPMAPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.32%

0.31%

+0.01%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.60%

0.80%

+0.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.15%

1.15%

+1.00%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.37%

2.33%

+1.04%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.37%

2.33%

+1.04%

CPST vs. PMAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

CPST has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is higher than PMAP's 0.50% expense ratio.


Dividends

CPST vs. PMAP - Dividend Comparison

Neither CPST nor PMAP has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


CPST and PMAP have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CPST has higher volatility (0.32%) compared to PMAP (0.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CPST dropped -3.79% vs PMAP's -1.75%.

On 1-year performance, CPST leads with 7.84% vs 7.53% for PMAP. On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CPST has performed better with a 7.84% return vs 7.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PMAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CPST.

CPST and PMAP have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: Calamos and PGIM. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CPST and 0.50% for PMAP.

PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.59 vs 3.66), 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 CPST and PMAP

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