LEGR vs. CBTJ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

LEGR (First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF) and CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) are both Blockchain funds. LEGR is passively managed, while CBTJ is actively managed. Over the past year, LEGR returned 25.32% vs -31.54% for CBTJ. At a 0.42 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. LEGR charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CBTJ.

Performance

LEGR vs. CBTJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF (LEGR) and Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LEGR achieves a 9.24% return, which is significantly higher than CBTJ's -19.03% return.

LEGR

• 1D: -1.93%
• 1M: -0.51%
• YTD: 9.24%
• 6M: 9.24%
• 1Y: 25.32%
• 3Y*: 22.41%
• 5Y*: 11.36%
• 10Y*: —

CBTJ

• 1D: -1.53%
• 1M: -10.16%
• YTD: -19.03%
• 6M: -20.42%
• 1Y: -31.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

LEGR vs. CBTJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
LEGR First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF	9.24%	25.66%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-19.03%	-11.32%

Correlation

The correlation between LEGR and CBTJ is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2025	0.42

Return for Risk

LEGR vs. CBTJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

LEGR

LEGR Risk / Return Rank: 53
LEGR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
LEGR Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
LEGR Omega Ratio Rank: 52
LEGR Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
LEGR Martin Ratio Rank: 54

CBTJ

CBTJ Risk / Return Rank: 2
CBTJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Omega Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBTJ Martin Ratio Rank: 3

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.

LEGR vs. CBTJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF (LEGR) and Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ). 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.

	LEGR	CBTJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.76	-1.17	+2.93
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.39	-1.67	+4.06
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	0.81	+0.49
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.45	-0.77	+3.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	8.91	-1.25	+10.16

LEGR vs. CBTJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LEGR Sharpe Ratio is 1.76, which is higher than the CBTJ Sharpe Ratio of -1.17. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LEGR and CBTJ, 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

LEGR vs. CBTJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LEGR drawdown since its inception was -36.12%, smaller than the maximum CBTJ drawdown of -40.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LEGR and CBTJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	LEGR	CBTJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.12%	-40.98%	+4.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.40%	-40.98%	+30.58%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.25%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-31.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.26%	-40.91%	+36.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.59%	-16.03%	+9.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.85%	25.32%	-22.47%

Volatility

LEGR vs. CBTJ - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF (LEGR) has a higher volatility of 5.98% compared to Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) at 5.30%. This indicates that LEGR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBTJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	LEGR	CBTJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.98%	5.30%	+0.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.30%	18.24%	-5.94%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.54%	27.04%	-12.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.09%	25.36%	-8.27%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.33%	25.36%	-5.03%

LEGR vs. CBTJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

LEGR has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is lower than CBTJ's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

LEGR vs. CBTJ - Dividend Comparison

LEGR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.71%, less than CBTJ's 1.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.79%	1.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
LEGR First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF	1.71%	1.84%	2.40%	2.56%	2.64%	1.80%	0.95%	2.04%	1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both LEGR and CBTJ in my portfolio?

LEGR and CBTJ 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, LEGR or CBTJ?

LEGR has higher volatility (5.98%) compared to CBTJ (5.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LEGR dropped -36.12% vs CBTJ's -40.98%.

Which ETF is better, LEGR or CBTJ?

On 1-year performance, LEGR leads with 25.32% vs -31.54% for CBTJ. On fees, LEGR is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, CBTJ has been the lower-risk option at 5.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, LEGR or CBTJ?

Over the 1-year period, LEGR has performed better with a 25.32% return vs -31.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, LEGR or CBTJ?

LEGR is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBTJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, LEGR or CBTJ?

CBTJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.79%, compared with 1.71% for LEGR.

What is the main difference between LEGR and CBTJ?

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for LEGR and 0.69% for CBTJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

LEGR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.76 vs -1.17), 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.