CSQ vs. RTH
CSQ (Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund) and RTH (VanEck Vectors Retail ETF) are both funds - CSQ is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Calamos, while RTH is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index. CSQ is actively managed, while RTH is passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CSQ returned 16.38%/yr vs 14.35%/yr for RTH. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CSQ charges 2.46%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RTH.
Performance
CSQ vs. RTH - Performance Comparison
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%
CSQ vs. RTH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
CSQ
RTH
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.
| CSQ | RTH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| CSQ | RTH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.35% | -3.58% | +1.23% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -9.33% | -7.34% | -1.99% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| CSQ | RTH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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