CVRT vs. MNA

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

CVRT (Calamos Convertible Equity Alternative ETF) and MNA (IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CVRT is a Convertible Bonds fund actively managed by Calamos, while MNA is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the IQ Merger Arbitrage Index. CVRT is actively managed, while MNA is passively managed. Over the past year, CVRT returned 65.98% vs 4.47% for MNA. At a 0.34 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CVRT charges 0.69%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for MNA.

Performance

CVRT vs. MNA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Calamos Convertible Equity Alternative ETF (CVRT) and IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CVRT achieves a 33.68% return, which is significantly higher than MNA's 1.79% return.

CVRT

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.03%
• YTD: 33.68%
• 6M: 32.37%
• 1Y: 65.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MNA

• 1D: -0.08%
• 1M: -0.14%
• YTD: 1.79%
• 6M: 1.97%
• 1Y: 4.47%
• 3Y*: 5.95%
• 5Y*: 1.83%
• 10Y*: 2.74%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

CVRT vs. MNA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CVRT Calamos Convertible Equity Alternative ETF	33.68%	29.37%	13.23%	11.02%
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF	1.79%	8.59%	4.93%	0.95%

Correlation

The correlation between CVRT and MNA is 0.33, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.33
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 5, 2023	0.34

CVRT vs. MNA - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CVRT	MNA
Technology	42.3%	8.3%
Utilities	13.8%	15.3%
Industrials	9.3%	22.3%
Financial Services	8.3%	11.4%
Healthcare	7.5%	11.3%
Communication Services	3.4%	9.2%
Real Estate	2.6%	5.1%
Energy	2.3%	-
Basic Materials	2.2%	10.3%
Consumer Cyclical	1.4%	2.4%
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	4.4%

Return for Risk

CVRT vs. MNA — Risk / Return Rank

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

CVRT

CVRT Risk / Return Rank: 92
CVRT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CVRT Sortino Ratio Rank: 88
CVRT Omega Ratio Rank: 89
CVRT Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
CVRT Martin Ratio Rank: 95

MNA

MNA Risk / Return Rank: 41
MNA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
MNA Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
MNA Omega Ratio Rank: 28
MNA Calmar Ratio Rank: 71
MNA Martin Ratio Rank: 52

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.

CVRT vs. MNA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Convertible Equity Alternative ETF (CVRT) and IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA). 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.

	CVRT	MNA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.99	0.95	+2.04
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.63	1.41	+2.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.51	1.17	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.71	3.22	+4.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	29.24	7.99	+21.24
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CVRT vs. MNA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CVRT Sharpe Ratio is 2.99, which is higher than the MNA Sharpe Ratio of 0.95. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CVRT and MNA, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CVRT	MNA	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.99	0.95	+2.04
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.37	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.42	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.68	0.36	+1.32

Drawdowns

CVRT vs. MNA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CVRT drawdown since its inception was -20.71%, which is greater than MNA's maximum drawdown of -16.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CVRT and MNA.

Drawdown Indicators

	CVRT	MNA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-20.71%	-16.68%	-4.03%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.60%	-1.40%	-7.20%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.01%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-10.45%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-16.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.26%	-0.55%	-5.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.07%	-2.83%	-0.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.26%	0.56%	+1.70%

Volatility

CVRT vs. MNA - Volatility Comparison

Calamos Convertible Equity Alternative ETF (CVRT) has a higher volatility of 9.06% compared to IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) at 1.66%. This indicates that CVRT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MNA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CVRT	MNA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.06%	1.66%	+7.40%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.46%	3.59%	+14.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.22%	4.75%	+17.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.20%	4.98%	+15.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.20%	6.55%	+13.65%

CVRT vs. MNA - Expense Ratio Comparison

CVRT has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than MNA's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

CVRT vs. MNA - Dividend Comparison

CVRT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, while MNA has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CVRT Calamos Convertible Equity Alternative ETF	1.50%	1.68%	1.49%	0.32%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	1.20%	0.00%	0.00%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.21%	0.87%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CVRT and MNA in my portfolio?

CVRT and MNA have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CVRT or MNA?

CVRT has higher volatility (9.06%) compared to MNA (1.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CVRT dropped -20.71% vs MNA's -16.68%.

Which ETF is better, CVRT or MNA?

On 1-year performance, CVRT leads with 65.98% vs 4.47% for MNA. On fees, CVRT is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, MNA has been the lower-risk option at 1.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CVRT or MNA?

Over the 1-year period, CVRT has performed better with a 65.98% return vs 4.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CVRT or MNA?

CVRT is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for MNA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CVRT or MNA?

CVRT has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 0.00% for MNA.

What is the main difference between CVRT and MNA?

CVRT is categorized as Convertible Bonds, while MNA is Hedge Fund. They also come from different issuers: Calamos and New York Life. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for CVRT and 0.77% for MNA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CVRT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 0.95), 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.