PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
CVGRX vs. EFT
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

CVGRX vs. EFT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) and Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Income Trust (EFT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CVGRX achieves a 11.25% return, which is significantly higher than EFT's -1.70% return. Over the past 10 years, CVGRX has outperformed EFT with an annualized return of 14.86%, while EFT has yielded a comparatively lower 5.39% annualized return.


CVGRX

1D
0.82%
1M
6.85%
YTD
11.25%
6M
10.27%
1Y
28.82%
3Y*
24.30%
5Y*
12.55%
10Y*
14.86%

EFT

1D
-0.28%
1M
-0.83%
YTD
-1.70%
6M
-1.21%
1Y
-4.42%
3Y*
8.41%
5Y*
3.64%
10Y*
5.39%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CVGRX vs. EFT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CVGRX
Calamos Growth Fund
11.25%16.08%32.32%37.64%-33.33%23.06%32.97%31.11%-6.14%26.58%
EFT
Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Income Trust
-1.70%-3.77%13.17%27.14%-19.69%21.00%2.41%16.85%-6.14%1.63%

Correlation

The correlation between CVGRX and EFT is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.36

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

0.30

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

0.36

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

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2004

0.32

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

CVGRX vs. EFT — Risk / Return Rank

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

CVGRX
CVGRX Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
CVGRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3838
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CVGRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
CVGRX Omega Ratio Rank: 3535
Omega Ratio Rank
CVGRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 2424
Calmar Ratio Rank
CVGRX Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
Martin Ratio Rank

EFT
EFT Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
EFT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2020
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1717
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFT Omega Ratio Rank: 1717
Omega Ratio Rank
EFT Calmar Ratio Rank: 3030
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFT Martin Ratio Rank: 2929
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.

CVGRX vs. EFT - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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.


CVGRXEFTDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

1.81

-0.48

+2.28

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

2.45

-0.62

+3.07

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

0.92

+0.39

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

1.86

-0.31

+2.17

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

6.98

-0.63

+7.61

CVGRX vs. EFT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CVGRX Sharpe Ratio is 1.81, which is higher than the EFT Sharpe Ratio of -0.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CVGRX and EFT, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


CVGRXEFTDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.81

-0.48

+2.28

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.58

0.29

+0.29

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.69

0.34

+0.35

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.51

0.27

+0.25

Drawdowns

CVGRX vs. EFT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CVGRX drawdown since its inception was -61.65%, roughly equal to the maximum EFT drawdown of -60.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CVGRX and EFT.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


CVGRXEFTDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-61.65%

-60.58%

-1.07%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-16.00%

-13.02%

-2.98%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-23.81%

-17.49%

-6.32%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-37.43%

-24.98%

-12.45%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-37.43%

-45.51%

+8.08%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-10.44%

+10.44%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.51%

-8.81%

-2.70%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.26%

6.40%

-2.14%

Volatility

CVGRX vs. EFT - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) has a higher volatility of 3.68% compared to Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Income Trust (EFT) at 1.64%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


CVGRXEFTDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.68%

1.64%

+2.04%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.72%

7.49%

+5.23%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.52%

9.33%

+7.19%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.81%

12.75%

+9.06%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.61%

15.77%

+5.84%

Dividends

CVGRX vs. EFT - Dividend Comparison

CVGRX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.92%, less than EFT's 9.26% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CVGRX
Calamos Growth Fund
7.92%8.81%6.66%4.48%0.00%12.17%11.25%9.71%16.86%13.75%4.12%35.24%
EFT
Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Income Trust
9.26%9.55%10.52%11.09%9.81%5.24%5.88%7.41%6.77%5.73%5.54%6.57%

Frequently Asked Questions


CVGRX and EFT have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CVGRX has higher volatility (3.68%) compared to EFT (1.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CVGRX dropped -61.65% vs EFT's -60.58%.

CVGRX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs -0.48), 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 CVGRX and EFT

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