GOF vs. CSQ

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

GOF (Guggenheim Strategic Opportunities Fund) and CSQ (Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund) are both mutual funds - GOF is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Guggenheim, while CSQ is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Calamos. Both are actively managed. Over the past 10 years, GOF returned 8.03%/yr vs 16.38%/yr for CSQ. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. GOF charges 1.62%/yr vs 2.46%/yr for CSQ.

Performance

GOF vs. CSQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Guggenheim Strategic Opportunities Fund (GOF) and Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GOF achieves a -7.43% return, which is significantly lower than CSQ's 8.10% return. Over the past 10 years, GOF has underperformed CSQ with an annualized return of 8.03%, while CSQ has yielded a comparatively higher 16.38% annualized return.

GOF

• 1D: 0.55%
• 1M: -2.45%
• YTD: -7.43%
• 6M: -0.79%
• 1Y: -12.68%
• 3Y*: 3.35%
• 5Y*: 0.42%
• 10Y*: 8.03%

CSQ

• 1D: 1.27%
• 1M: -0.51%
• YTD: 8.10%
• 6M: 9.75%
• 1Y: 22.69%
• 3Y*: 20.54%
• 5Y*: 10.41%
• 10Y*: 16.38%

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

GOF vs. CSQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GOF Guggenheim Strategic Opportunities Fund	-7.43%	-1.92%	38.04%	-3.04%	-5.78%	4.90%	21.51%	10.51%	-5.95%	22.01%
CSQ Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund	8.10%	16.25%	28.11%	20.80%	-24.26%	30.77%	26.22%	38.62%	-4.89%	27.98%

Correlation

The correlation between GOF and CSQ is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.39
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.44
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.39
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2007	0.38

Return for Risk

GOF vs. CSQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

GOF

GOF Risk / Return Rank: 1
GOF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
GOF Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
GOF Omega Ratio Rank: 1
GOF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
GOF Martin Ratio Rank: 1

CSQ

CSQ Risk / Return Rank: 36
CSQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
CSQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
CSQ Omega Ratio Rank: 41
CSQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
CSQ Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

GOF vs. CSQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Guggenheim Strategic Opportunities Fund (GOF) 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.

	GOF	CSQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.71	1.51	-2.22
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.81	2.06	-2.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.27	-0.40
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.55	1.49	-2.04
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.01	6.36	-7.38

GOF vs. CSQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GOF Sharpe Ratio is -0.71, which is lower than the CSQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GOF and CSQ, 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

GOF vs. CSQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GOF drawdown since its inception was -54.66%, smaller than the maximum CSQ drawdown of -67.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GOF and CSQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	GOF	CSQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.66%	-67.17%	+12.51%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.24%	-15.25%	-7.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-28.56%	-24.18%	-4.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.41%	-33.09%	+0.68%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-38.50%	-48.21%	+9.71%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.55%	-2.35%	-15.20%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.07%	-9.33%	+2.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	12.53%	3.58%	+8.95%

Volatility

GOF vs. CSQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Guggenheim Strategic Opportunities Fund (GOF) is 3.50%, while Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) has a volatility of 5.74%. This indicates that GOF 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.

Volatility by Period

	GOF	CSQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.50%	5.74%	-2.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.94%	12.45%	-1.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.97%	15.06%	+2.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.18%	20.06%	-1.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.52%	23.02%	-3.50%

GOF vs. CSQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

GOF has a 1.62% expense ratio, which is lower than CSQ's 2.46% expense ratio.

Dividends

GOF vs. CSQ - Dividend Comparison

GOF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.79%, more than CSQ's 6.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSQ Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund	6.72%	6.51%	6.95%	8.27%	9.17%	6.38%	7.03%	7.14%	9.35%	8.20%	9.64%	10.00%
GOF Guggenheim Strategic Opportunities Fund	19.79%	16.97%	14.32%	17.07%	14.36%	11.93%	11.26%	12.08%	11.96%	10.13%	11.13%	12.98%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GOF and CSQ in my portfolio?

GOF and CSQ have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GOF or CSQ?

CSQ has higher volatility (5.74%) compared to GOF (3.50%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GOF dropped -54.66% vs CSQ's -67.17%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs -0.71), 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.