CXGCX vs. PCF
CXGCX (Calamos Global Convertible Fund) and PCF (High Income Securities Fund) are both Convertible Bonds funds. Over the past 10 years, CXGCX returned 8.96%/yr vs 5.49%/yr for PCF. Their 0.39 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship.
Performance
CXGCX vs. PCF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CXGCX achieves a 14.10% return, which is significantly higher than PCF's -7.81% return. Over the past 10 years, CXGCX has outperformed PCF with an annualized return of 8.96%, while PCF has yielded a comparatively lower 5.49% annualized return.
CXGCX
- 1D
- 1.49%
- 1M
- -0.13%
- 6M
- 10.80%
- YTD
- 14.10%
- 1Y
- 23.25%
- 3Y*
- 14.87%
- 5Y*
- 5.30%
- 10Y*
- 8.96%
- ALL TIME*
- 7.92%
PCF
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- -4.01%
- 6M
- -7.56%
- YTD
- -7.81%
- 1Y
- -5.80%
- 3Y*
- 5.45%
- 5Y*
- -0.68%
- 10Y*
- 5.49%
- ALL TIME*
- 5.04%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | |
| $275.34K | $274.09K | $326.49K |
CXGCX vs. PCF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CXGCX Calamos Global Convertible Fund | 14.10% | 18.49% | 10.98% | 13.48% | -22.06% | -0.31% | 38.60% | 15.18% | -2.76% | 14.25% |
PCF High Income Securities Fund | -7.81% | 5.31% | 16.66% | 10.45% | -15.56% | 11.44% | 8.13% | 4.22% | 5.46% | 14.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between CXGCX and PCF is 0.37, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.37 |
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history. | 0.34 |
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period. | 0.39 |
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions. | 0.37 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 2, 2015 | 0.39 |
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
CXGCX vs. PCF — Risk / Return Rank
CXGCX
PCF
CXGCX vs. PCF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Calamos Global Convertible Fund (CXGCX) and High Income Securities Fund (PCF). 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.
| CXGCX | PCF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +2.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +3.62 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 0.92 | +0.44 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.95 | -0.60 | +4.55 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 11.29 | -1.26 | +12.55 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
CXGCX vs. PCF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CXGCX drawdown since its inception was -30.74%, smaller than the maximum PCF drawdown of -53.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CXGCX and PCF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CXGCX | PCF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -30.74% | -53.82% | +23.08% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.75% | -10.73% | +4.98% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -8.92% | -13.74% | +4.82% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -28.88% | -29.06% | +0.18% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -30.74% | -45.13% | +14.39% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.83% | -9.67% | +6.84% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.19% | -10.48% | +3.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.01% | 5.08% | -3.07% |
Volatility
CXGCX vs. PCF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Calamos Global Convertible Fund (CXGCX) is 2.92%, while High Income Securities Fund (PCF) has a volatility of 3.77%. This indicates that CXGCX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PCF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CXGCX | PCF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.92% | 3.77% | -0.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 8.64% | 10.55% | -1.91% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.98% | 11.94% | -0.96% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.83% | 16.05% | -6.22% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.58% | 17.54% | -7.96% |
Dividends
CXGCX vs. PCF - Dividend Comparison
CXGCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.69%, less than PCF's 13.30% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CXGCX Calamos Global Convertible Fund | 4.69% | 5.15% | 0.00% | 0.39% | 0.00% | 14.77% | 8.19% | 2.36% | 5.75% | 3.73% | 2.22% | 1.30% |
PCF High Income Securities Fund | 13.30% | 11.57% | 11.29% | 11.29% | 13.48% | 10.82% | 11.46% | 3.29% | 6.88% | 3.97% | 4.52% | 5.07% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CXGCX and PCF have a correlation of 0.37, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
PCF has higher volatility (3.77%) compared to CXGCX (2.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CXGCX dropped -30.74% vs PCF's -53.82%.
CXGCX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs -0.54), 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 CXGCX and PCF
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