EFAS vs. CCEF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

EFAS (Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF) and CCEF (Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF) are both Dividend funds. EFAS is passively managed, while CCEF is actively managed. Over the past year, EFAS returned 32.01% vs 12.87% for CCEF. Their 0.45 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. EFAS charges 0.55%/yr vs 2.74%/yr for CCEF.

Performance

EFAS vs. CCEF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) and Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF (CCEF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EFAS achieves a 20.56% return, which is significantly higher than CCEF's 6.53% return.

EFAS

• 1D: -0.90%
• 1M: 6.31%
• 6M: 14.73%
• YTD: 20.56%
• 1Y: 32.01%
• 3Y*: 25.41%
• 5Y*: 14.43%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 10.80%

CCEF

• 1D: 0.34%
• 1M: -0.32%
• 6M: 3.30%
• YTD: 6.53%
• 1Y: 12.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 14.94%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
CCEF Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF	$74.18K	$103.33K	$101.25K
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	$411.25K	$354.75K	$345.09K

EFAS vs. CCEF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	20.56%	46.83%	4.22%
CCEF Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF	6.53%	13.47%	17.80%

Correlation

The correlation between EFAS and CCEF is 0.42, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 16, 2024	0.45

Return for Risk

EFAS vs. CCEF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

EFAS

EFAS Risk / Return Rank: 94
EFAS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
EFAS Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
EFAS Omega Ratio Rank: 94
EFAS Calmar Ratio Rank: 96
EFAS Martin Ratio Rank: 91

CCEF

CCEF Risk / Return Rank: 57
CCEF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
CCEF Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
CCEF Omega Ratio Rank: 63
CCEF Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
CCEF Martin Ratio Rank: 57

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.

EFAS vs. CCEF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) and Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF (CCEF). 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.

	EFAS	CCEF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.94	1.45	+1.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.11	2.04	+2.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	1.27	+0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.07	1.58	+4.50
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.92	6.74	+8.17

EFAS vs. CCEF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EFAS Sharpe Ratio is 2.94, which is higher than the CCEF Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EFAS and CCEF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

EFAS vs. CCEF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EFAS drawdown since its inception was -44.38%, which is greater than CCEF's maximum drawdown of -13.25%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EFAS and CCEF.

Drawdown Indicators

	EFAS	CCEF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.38%	-13.25%	-31.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.30%	-7.75%	+2.45%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-11.84%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.81%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.90%	-0.86%	-0.04%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.99%	-1.32%	-5.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.15%	1.81%	+0.34%

Volatility

EFAS vs. CCEF - Volatility Comparison

Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF (EFAS) has a higher volatility of 2.71% compared to Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF (CCEF) at 2.06%. This indicates that EFAS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCEF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EFAS	CCEF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.71%	2.06%	+0.65%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.68%	7.14%	+1.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.95%	8.41%	+2.54%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.51%	10.66%	+4.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.23%	10.66%	+7.57%

EFAS vs. CCEF - Expense Ratio Comparison

EFAS has a 0.55% expense ratio, which is lower than CCEF's 2.74% expense ratio.

Dividends

EFAS vs. CCEF - Dividend Comparison

EFAS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.52%, less than CCEF's 8.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
CCEF Calamos CEF Income & Arbitrage ETF	7.36%	8.08%	6.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
EFAS Global X MSCI SuperDividend® EAFE ETF	4.52%	4.83%	6.76%	6.33%	7.28%	5.19%	4.34%	5.75%	6.63%	6.15%	0.21%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EFAS and CCEF in my portfolio?

EFAS and CCEF have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EFAS or CCEF?

EFAS has higher volatility (2.71%) compared to CCEF (2.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EFAS dropped -44.38% vs CCEF's -13.25%.

Which ETF is better, EFAS or CCEF?

On 1-year performance, EFAS leads with 32.01% vs 12.87% for CCEF. On fees, EFAS is cheaper at 0.55% per year. On volatility, CCEF has been the lower-risk option at 2.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EFAS or CCEF?

Over the 1-year period, EFAS has performed better with a 32.01% return vs 12.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EFAS or CCEF?

EFAS is cheaper with a 0.55% expense ratio, compared with 2.74% for CCEF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EFAS or CCEF?

CCEF has the higher dividend yield at 7.36%, compared with 4.52% for EFAS.

What is the main difference between EFAS and CCEF?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.55% for EFAS and 2.74% for CCEF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EFAS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.94 vs 1.45), 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.