FEBZ vs. CPRA

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

FEBZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF) and CPRA (Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April) are both Defined Outcome funds. FEBZ is passively managed, while CPRA is actively managed. Over the past year, FEBZ returned 16.38% vs 9.06% for CPRA. Their 0.73 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. FEBZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CPRA.

Performance

FEBZ vs. CPRA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) and Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FEBZ achieves a 8.27% return, which is significantly higher than CPRA's 4.77% return.

FEBZ

• 1D: 1.13%
• 1M: 1.22%
• 6M: 6.89%
• YTD: 8.27%
• 1Y: 16.38%
• 3Y*: 14.62%
• 5Y*: 10.57%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 11.98%

CPRA

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 0.50%
• 6M: 4.06%
• YTD: 4.77%
• 1Y: 9.06%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 8.85%

*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)
CPRA Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	$23.72K	$26.42K	$31.57K
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF	$288.75K	$138.93K	$218.46K

FEBZ vs. CPRA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF	8.27%	16.42%
CPRA Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	4.77%	6.93%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBZ and CPRA is 0.71, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025	0.73

The correlation between FEBZ and CPRA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.73 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FEBZ vs. CPRA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBZ

FEBZ Risk / Return Rank: 63
FEBZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
FEBZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
FEBZ Omega Ratio Rank: 61
FEBZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 59
FEBZ Martin Ratio Rank: 68

CPRA

CPRA Risk / Return Rank: 98
CPRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
CPRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
CPRA Omega Ratio Rank: 98
CPRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
CPRA Martin Ratio Rank: 98

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.

FEBZ vs. CPRA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) and Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA). 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.

	FEBZ	CPRA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.65	4.28	-2.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.31	7.61	-5.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	2.05	-0.76
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.30	10.20	-7.90
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.19	58.41	-49.21

FEBZ vs. CPRA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBZ Sharpe Ratio is 1.65, which is lower than the CPRA Sharpe Ratio of 4.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBZ and CPRA, 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

FEBZ vs. CPRA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBZ drawdown since its inception was -17.50%, which is greater than CPRA's maximum drawdown of -1.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBZ and CPRA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBZ	CPRA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.50%	-1.69%	-15.81%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.14%	-0.89%	-6.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.68%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.50%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.23%	0.00%	-0.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.27%	-0.14%	-3.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.79%	0.16%	+1.63%

Volatility

FEBZ vs. CPRA - Volatility Comparison

TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) has a higher volatility of 3.00% compared to Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA) at 0.47%. This indicates that FEBZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CPRA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FEBZ	CPRA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.00%	0.47%	+2.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.72%	1.36%	+6.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.97%	2.13%	+7.84%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.55%	2.71%	+9.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.32%	2.71%	+9.61%

FEBZ vs. CPRA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CPRA's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEBZ vs. CPRA - Dividend Comparison

FEBZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, while CPRA has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
CPRA Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF	2.95%	3.20%	3.88%	6.81%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBZ and CPRA in my portfolio?

FEBZ and CPRA have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FEBZ or CPRA?

FEBZ has higher volatility (3.00%) compared to CPRA (0.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBZ dropped -17.50% vs CPRA's -1.69%.

Which ETF is better, FEBZ or CPRA?

On 1-year performance, FEBZ leads with 16.38% vs 9.06% for CPRA. On fees, CPRA is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CPRA has been the lower-risk option at 0.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBZ or CPRA?

Over the 1-year period, FEBZ has performed better with a 16.38% return vs 9.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBZ or CPRA?

CPRA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for FEBZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FEBZ or CPRA?

FEBZ has the higher dividend yield at 2.95%, compared with 0.00% for CPRA.

What is the main difference between FEBZ and CPRA?

They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for FEBZ and 0.69% for CPRA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CPRA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.28 vs 1.65), 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.