CSQ vs. MHELX
CSQ (Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund) and MHELX (MH Elite Small Cap Fund of Funds Fund) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Over the past 10 years, CSQ returned 16.44%/yr vs 9.53%/yr for MHELX. A 0.60 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSQ charges 2.46%/yr vs 1.25%/yr for MHELX.
Performance
CSQ vs. MHELX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CSQ achieves a 9.07% return, which is significantly lower than MHELX's 20.27% return. Over the past 10 years, CSQ has outperformed MHELX with an annualized return of 16.44%, while MHELX has yielded a comparatively lower 9.53% annualized return.
CSQ
- 1D
- -0.64%
- 1M
- 0.37%
- YTD
- 9.07%
- 6M
- 8.12%
- 1Y
- 23.85%
- 3Y*
- 20.73%
- 5Y*
- 10.55%
- 10Y*
- 16.44%
MHELX
- 1D
- 1.30%
- 1M
- 4.02%
- YTD
- 20.27%
- 6M
- 19.08%
- 1Y
- 40.05%
- 3Y*
- 15.91%
- 5Y*
- 5.29%
- 10Y*
- 9.53%
CSQ vs. MHELX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSQ Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund | 9.07% | 16.25% | 28.11% | 20.80% | -24.26% | 30.77% | 26.22% | 38.62% | -4.89% | 27.98% |
MHELX MH Elite Small Cap Fund of Funds Fund | 20.27% | 3.45% | 12.51% | 16.30% | -20.27% | 14.07% | 20.57% | 22.49% | -12.76% | 12.42% |
Correlation
The correlation between CSQ and MHELX is 0.20, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.20 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.48 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2004 | 0.60 |
Over the past year, the correlation between CSQ and MHELX has dropped to 0.20 - well below their long-term average of 0.60, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.
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
CSQ vs. MHELX — Risk / Return Rank
CSQ
MHELX
CSQ vs. MHELX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) and MH Elite Small Cap Fund of Funds Fund (MHELX). 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.
| CSQ | MHELX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.46 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.73 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | 1.38 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.57 | 4.70 | -3.13 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.68 | 15.78 | -9.10 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CSQ vs. MHELX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CSQ drawdown since its inception was -67.17%, which is greater than MHELX's maximum drawdown of -61.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSQ and MHELX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CSQ | MHELX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -67.17% | -61.24% | -5.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -15.25% | -8.52% | -6.73% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.18% | -30.81% | +6.63% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -33.09% | -32.01% | -1.08% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -48.21% | -39.02% | -9.19% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.47% | -0.20% | -1.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.32% | -12.91% | +3.59% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.58% | 2.53% | +1.05% |
Volatility
CSQ vs. MHELX - Volatility Comparison
Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) and MH Elite Small Cap Fund of Funds Fund (MHELX) have volatilities of 5.97% and 5.83%, 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
| CSQ | MHELX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.97% | 5.83% | +0.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.73% | 15.78% | -3.05% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.29% | 19.73% | -4.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.12% | 21.09% | -0.97% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 23.04% | 21.02% | +2.02% |
CSQ vs. MHELX - Expense Ratio Comparison
CSQ has a 2.46% expense ratio, which is higher than MHELX's 1.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
CSQ vs. MHELX - Dividend Comparison
CSQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.66%, more than MHELX's 6.00% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSQ Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund | 6.66% | 6.51% | 6.95% | 8.27% | 9.17% | 6.38% | 7.03% | 7.14% | 9.35% | 8.20% | 9.64% | 10.00% |
MHELX MH Elite Small Cap Fund of Funds Fund | 6.00% | 0.00% | 2.19% | 0.00% | 14.45% | 5.03% | 2.70% | 6.13% | 0.00% | 5.17% | 5.51% | 6.93% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CSQ and MHELX have a correlation of 0.20, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CSQ has higher volatility (5.97%) compared to MHELX (5.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSQ dropped -67.17% vs MHELX's -61.24%.
MHELX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.03 vs 1.57), 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 CSQ and MHELX
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