GLO vs. CSQ
GLO (Clough Global Opportunities Fund) is a stock, while CSQ (Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund) is Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Calamos. Over the past 10 years, GLO returned 7.18%/yr vs 15.97%/yr for CSQ. A 0.63 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.
Performance
GLO vs. CSQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLO achieves a 11.57% return, which is significantly higher than CSQ's 10.82% return. Over the past 10 years, GLO has underperformed CSQ with an annualized return of 7.18%, while CSQ has yielded a comparatively higher 15.97% annualized return.
GLO
- 1D
- -0.83%
- 1M
- 0.57%
- 6M
- 5.42%
- YTD
- 11.57%
- 1Y
- 22.71%
- 3Y*
- 18.15%
- 5Y*
- -2.45%
- 10Y*
- 7.18%
CSQ
- 1D
- -0.97%
- 1M
- 0.76%
- 6M
- 9.34%
- YTD
- 10.82%
- 1Y
- 20.88%
- 3Y*
- 19.68%
- 5Y*
- 10.76%
- 10Y*
- 15.97%
GLO vs. CSQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLO Clough Global Opportunities Fund | 11.57% | 23.76% | 21.83% | 4.69% | -44.50% | 6.31% | 32.98% | 28.24% | -15.41% | 34.87% |
CSQ Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund | 10.82% | 16.25% | 28.11% | 20.80% | -24.26% | 30.77% | 26.22% | 38.62% | -4.89% | 27.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between GLO and CSQ is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.69 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.67 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.64 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 2, 2006 | 0.63 |
The correlation between GLO and CSQ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.63 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
GLO vs. CSQ — Risk / Return Rank
GLO
CSQ
GLO vs. CSQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Clough Global Opportunities Fund (GLO) and Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ). 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.
| GLO | CSQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.18 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.33 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.27 | 1.24 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.20 | 1.38 | +0.83 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.62 | 5.83 | +2.79 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
GLO vs. CSQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLO drawdown since its inception was -60.53%, smaller than the maximum CSQ drawdown of -67.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLO and CSQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLO | CSQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -60.53% | -67.17% | +6.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.37% | -15.25% | +4.88% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.91% | -24.18% | +7.27% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -58.59% | -33.09% | -25.50% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -58.59% | -48.21% | -10.38% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -19.05% | -0.97% | -18.08% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -17.14% | -9.30% | -7.84% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.64% | 3.59% | -0.95% |
Volatility
GLO vs. CSQ - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Clough Global Opportunities Fund (GLO) is 4.08%, while Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) has a volatility of 4.65%. This indicates that GLO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CSQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| GLO | CSQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.08% | 4.65% | -0.57% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.88% | 12.88% | -1.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.85% | 15.45% | -0.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.80% | 20.15% | -0.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.31% | 23.01% | -1.70% |
Dividends
GLO vs. CSQ - Dividend Comparison
GLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.41%, more than CSQ's 6.76% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSQ Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund | 6.76% | 6.51% | 6.95% | 8.27% | 9.17% | 6.38% | 7.03% | 7.14% | 9.35% | 8.20% | 9.64% | 10.00% |
GLO Clough Global Opportunities Fund | 10.41% | 10.62% | 11.25% | 12.33% | 22.32% | 12.26% | 9.69% | 11.12% | 14.48% | 10.11% | 12.63% | 11.49% |
Frequently Asked Questions
GLO and CSQ have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CSQ has higher volatility (4.65%) compared to GLO (4.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLO dropped -60.53% vs CSQ's -67.17%.
GLO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.54 vs 1.36), 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 GLO and CSQ
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