CVGRX vs. EFT

In the year-to-date period, CVGRX achieves a 1.26% return, which is significantly lower than EFT's 4.83% return. Over the past 10 years, CVGRX has underperformed EFT with an annualized return of 1.13%, while EFT has yielded a comparatively higher 7.50% annualized return.

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) and Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Income Trust (EFT). 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.

The current CVGRX Sharpe Ratio is 1.14, which is comparable to the EFT Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CVGRX and EFT, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

CVGRX has not paid dividends to shareholders, while EFT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.04%.

The maximum CVGRX drawdown since its inception was -69.30%, which is greater than EFT's maximum drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CVGRX and EFT. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.

Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) has a higher volatility of 6.20% compared to Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Income Trust (EFT) at 4.14%. This indicates that CVGRX's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.