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 4.04% return, which is significantly higher than EFT's -2.04% return. Over the past 10 years, CVGRX has outperformed EFT with an annualized return of 13.87%, while EFT has yielded a comparatively lower 5.23% annualized return.


CVGRX

1D
3.04%
1M
-2.38%
6M
4.75%
YTD
4.04%
1Y
12.73%
3Y*
18.96%
5Y*
9.41%
10Y*
13.87%
ALL TIME*
11.16%

EFT

1D
-0.28%
1M
-0.79%
6M
-2.90%
YTD
-2.04%
1Y
-5.78%
3Y*
5.96%
5Y*
3.14%
10Y*
5.23%
ALL TIME*
4.57%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$0.00$0.00$0.00
$699.02K$595.84K$824.52K

CVGRX vs. EFT - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
CVGRX
Calamos Growth Fund
4.04%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
-2.04%-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 historical price movements had little consistent relationship.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.36

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.31

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.36

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.34

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 26, 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 historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

CVGRX
CVGRX Risk / Return Rank: 1414
Overall Rank
CVGRX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1414
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CVGRX Sortino Ratio Rank: 1414
Sortino Ratio Rank
CVGRX Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
CVGRX Calmar Ratio Rank: 1313
Calmar Ratio Rank
CVGRX Martin Ratio Rank: 1616
Martin Ratio Rank

EFT
EFT Risk / Return Rank: 1313
Overall Rank
EFT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1111
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EFT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1111
Sortino Ratio Rank
EFT Omega Ratio Rank: 1212
Omega Ratio Rank
EFT Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
EFT Martin Ratio Rank: 88
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

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.

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.


CVGRXEFTDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.32

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.97

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

0.87

+0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.64

-0.62

+1.27

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

2.20

-1.39

+3.59

CVGRX vs. EFT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CVGRX Sharpe Ratio is 0.56, which is higher than the EFT Sharpe Ratio of -0.76. 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...

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%

-10.54%

-5.46%

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

-6.48%

-10.75%

+4.27%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-11.47%

-8.82%

-2.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.68%

5.41%

-0.73%

Volatility

CVGRX vs. EFT - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Growth Fund (CVGRX) has a higher volatility of 5.68% compared to Eaton Vance Floating-Rate Income Trust (EFT) at 1.36%. 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

5.68%

1.36%

+4.32%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.95%

7.14%

+7.81%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.44%

8.66%

+9.78%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.10%

12.71%

+9.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.71%

15.72%

+5.99%

Dividends

CVGRX vs. EFT - Dividend Comparison

CVGRX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.47%, less than EFT's 8.91% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CVGRX
Calamos Growth Fund
8.47%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
8.91%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 (5.68%) compared to EFT (1.36%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CVGRX dropped -61.65% vs EFT's -60.58%.

CVGRX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.56 vs -0.76), 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