PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CSQ vs. RTH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CSQ vs. RTH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) and VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CSQ achieves a 8.10% return, which is significantly higher than RTH's 4.33% return. Over the past 10 years, CSQ has outperformed RTH with an annualized return of 16.38%, while RTH has yielded a comparatively lower 14.35% annualized return.


CSQ

1D
1.27%
1M
-1.20%
YTD
8.10%
6M
9.75%
1Y
24.17%
3Y*
20.54%
5Y*
10.41%
10Y*
16.38%

RTH

1D
-0.06%
1M
-1.59%
YTD
4.33%
6M
2.84%
1Y
12.87%
3Y*
16.16%
5Y*
9.69%
10Y*
14.35%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CSQ vs. RTH - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CSQ
Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund
8.10%16.25%28.11%20.80%-24.26%30.77%26.22%38.62%-4.89%27.98%
RTH
VanEck Vectors Retail ETF
4.33%12.36%20.02%20.07%-17.67%24.94%31.62%29.06%3.87%22.45%

Correlation

The correlation between CSQ and RTH is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.47

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.58

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.67

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.64

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2004

0.57

The correlation between CSQ and RTH shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.67 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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. RTH — Risk / Return Rank

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

CSQ
CSQ Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
CSQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4242
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CSQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
CSQ Omega Ratio Rank: 4141
Omega Ratio Rank
CSQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2525
Calmar Ratio Rank
CSQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3434
Martin Ratio Rank

RTH
RTH Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
RTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTH Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
RTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTH Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
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.

CSQ vs. RTH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) and VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH). 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.


CSQRTHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.54

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.54

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.27

1.18

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.49

1.50

-0.01

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

6.36

4.99

+1.37

CSQ vs. RTH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CSQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.51, which is higher than the RTH Sharpe Ratio of 0.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CSQ and RTH, 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...

Drawdowns

CSQ vs. RTH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CSQ drawdown since its inception was -67.17%, which is greater than RTH's maximum drawdown of -42.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CSQ and RTH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CSQRTHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.17%

-42.32%

-24.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.25%

-7.83%

-7.42%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-24.18%

-13.80%

-10.38%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.09%

-25.00%

-8.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-48.21%

-25.00%

-23.21%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.35%

-3.58%

+1.23%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.33%

-7.34%

-1.99%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.58%

2.35%

+1.23%

Volatility

CSQ vs. RTH - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) has a higher volatility of 5.74% compared to VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) at 3.85%. This indicates that CSQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RTH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CSQRTHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.74%

3.85%

+1.89%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.45%

9.28%

+3.17%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.06%

12.09%

+2.97%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.06%

16.81%

+3.25%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.02%

17.54%

+5.48%

CSQ vs. RTH - Expense Ratio Comparison

CSQ has a 2.46% expense ratio, which is higher than RTH's 0.35% expense ratio.


Dividends

CSQ vs. RTH - Dividend Comparison

CSQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.72%, more than RTH's 0.93% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CSQ
Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund
6.72%6.51%6.95%8.27%9.17%6.38%7.03%7.14%9.35%8.20%9.64%10.00%
RTH
VanEck Vectors Retail ETF
0.93%0.97%0.77%1.07%1.16%0.78%0.64%0.91%1.05%1.56%1.84%2.25%

Frequently Asked Questions


CSQ and RTH have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CSQ has higher volatility (5.74%) compared to RTH (3.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CSQ dropped -67.17% vs RTH's -42.32%.

CSQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs 0.97), 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 CSQ and RTH

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