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

Performance

CPST 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 - September (CPST) and FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading graphics...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CPST achieves a 1.02% return, which is significantly lower than QMAR's 6.96% return.


CPST

1D
0.13%
1M
0.92%
YTD
1.02%
6M
2.02%
1Y
9.21%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

QMAR

1D
0.89%
1M
5.42%
YTD
6.96%
6M
9.87%
1Y
26.98%
3Y*
16.82%
5Y*
10.97%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CPST vs. QMAR - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between CPST and QMAR 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 Sep 4, 2024

0.77

The correlation between CPST and QMAR has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.76 to 0.77 — 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. QMAR — 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: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CPST Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
CPST Omega Ratio Rank: 9696
Omega Ratio Rank
CPST Calmar Ratio Rank: 9292
Calmar Ratio Rank
CPST Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank

QMAR
QMAR Risk / Return Rank: 9696
Overall Rank
QMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
QMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 9797
Omega Ratio Rank
QMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 9696
Calmar Ratio Rank
QMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 9898
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. QMAR - 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 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.


CPSTQMARDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

3.40

3.58

-0.18

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

5.87

5.68

+0.19

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.81

1.92

-0.11

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

6.25

8.74

-2.49

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

30.44

54.13

-23.69

CPST vs. QMAR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CPST Sharpe Ratio is 3.40, which is comparable to the QMAR Sharpe Ratio of 3.58. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CPST 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.


Loading graphics...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CPSTQMARDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.40

3.58

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.78

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.82

0.84

+0.98

Drawdowns

CPST vs. QMAR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CPST drawdown since its inception was -3.79%, smaller than the maximum QMAR drawdown of -19.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CPST and QMAR.


Loading graphics...

Drawdown Indicators


CPSTQMARDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-3.79%

-19.83%

+16.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-1.42%

-3.35%

+1.93%

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

-0.37%

-3.37%

+3.00%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.29%

0.55%

-0.26%

Volatility

CPST vs. QMAR - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPST) is 1.15%, while FT Cboe Vest Nasdaq-100 Buffer ETF - March (QMAR) has a volatility of 3.97%. This indicates that CPST 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.


Loading graphics...

Volatility by Period


CPSTQMARDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.15%

3.97%

-2.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

1.73%

4.94%

-3.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.73%

7.62%

-4.89%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

3.49%

14.05%

-10.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

3.49%

14.01%

-10.52%

CPST vs. QMAR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

CPST vs. QMAR - Dividend Comparison

Neither CPST nor QMAR has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments