MPBAX vs. CHW

Last updated Jun 6, 2026

MPBAX (Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund Trust Global Strategist Portfolio) and CHW (Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund) are both Global Allocation funds. Over the past 10 years, MPBAX returned 7.44%/yr vs 12.29%/yr for CHW. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MPBAX charges 0.72%/yr vs 2.63%/yr for CHW.

Performance

MPBAX vs. CHW - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund Trust Global Strategist Portfolio (MPBAX) and Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MPBAX achieves a 7.39% return, which is significantly lower than CHW's 20.64% return. Over the past 10 years, MPBAX has underperformed CHW with an annualized return of 7.44%, while CHW has yielded a comparatively higher 12.29% annualized return.

MPBAX

• 1D: 0.29%
• 1M: 1.11%
• YTD: 7.39%
• 6M: 7.92%
• 1Y: 17.83%
• 3Y*: 13.84%
• 5Y*: 5.18%
• 10Y*: 7.44%

CHW

• 1D: -3.43%
• 1M: 0.34%
• YTD: 20.64%
• 6M: 22.94%
• 1Y: 37.22%
• 3Y*: 24.68%
• 5Y*: 5.43%
• 10Y*: 12.29%

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

MPBAX vs. CHW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
MPBAX Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund Trust Global Strategist Portfolio	7.39%	17.66%	7.48%	14.29%	-16.71%	8.62%	11.53%	18.05%	-6.31%	16.67%
CHW Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund	20.64%	19.55%	27.82%	14.55%	-37.74%	13.07%	22.28%	47.12%	-20.33%	43.78%

Correlation

The correlation between MPBAX and CHW is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.70
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.72
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 27, 2007	0.67

The correlation between MPBAX and CHW has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

MPBAX vs. CHW — Risk / Return Rank

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

MPBAX

MPBAX Risk / Return Rank: 54
MPBAX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 58
MPBAX Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
MPBAX Omega Ratio Rank: 61
MPBAX Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
MPBAX Martin Ratio Rank: 53

CHW

CHW Risk / Return Rank: 53
CHW Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
CHW Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
CHW Omega Ratio Rank: 58
CHW Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
CHW Martin Ratio Rank: 45

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.

MPBAX vs. CHW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund Trust Global Strategist Portfolio (MPBAX) and Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW). 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.

	MPBAX	CHW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.18	2.29	-0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.16	3.03	+0.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.41	+0.01
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.32	2.41	-0.09
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.34	9.25	+1.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MPBAX vs. CHW - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MPBAX Sharpe Ratio is 2.18, which is comparable to the CHW Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MPBAX and CHW, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MPBAX	CHW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.18	2.29	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52	0.28	+0.24
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.70	0.55	+0.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.67	0.28	+0.39

Drawdowns

MPBAX vs. CHW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MPBAX drawdown since its inception was -39.46%, smaller than the maximum CHW drawdown of -66.94%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MPBAX and CHW.

Drawdown Indicators

	MPBAX	CHW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-39.46%	-66.94%	+27.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.65%	-15.51%	+7.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-8.52%	-20.40%	+11.88%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.16%	-46.11%	+20.95%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-26.45%	-53.58%	+27.13%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.33%	-4.70%	+4.37%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.44%	-14.88%	+9.44%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.71%	4.03%	-2.32%

Volatility

MPBAX vs. CHW - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund Trust Global Strategist Portfolio (MPBAX) is 2.70%, while Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund (CHW) has a volatility of 7.17%. This indicates that MPBAX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CHW based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MPBAX	CHW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.70%	7.17%	-4.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	6.84%	14.09%	-7.25%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	8.15%	16.34%	-8.19%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.02%	19.17%	-9.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.63%	22.33%	-11.70%

MPBAX vs. CHW - Expense Ratio Comparison

MPBAX has a 0.72% expense ratio, which is lower than CHW's 2.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

MPBAX vs. CHW - Dividend Comparison

MPBAX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 6.31%, less than CHW's 6.88% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CHW Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund	6.88%	8.10%	8.89%	10.40%	13.62%	8.43%	8.79%	9.67%	12.82%	9.25%	12.05%	11.73%
MPBAX Morgan Stanley Institutional Fund Trust Global Strategist Portfolio	6.31%	6.77%	2.70%	0.00%	0.61%	7.91%	1.32%	1.74%	14.65%	6.52%	1.15%	0.11%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MPBAX and CHW in my portfolio?

MPBAX and CHW have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MPBAX or CHW?

CHW has higher volatility (7.17%) compared to MPBAX (2.70%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MPBAX dropped -39.46% vs CHW's -66.94%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CHW currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 2.18), 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.