NODE vs. CBTJ

Last updated Aug 1, 2026

NODE (VanEck Onchain Economy ETF) and CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) are both Blockchain funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, NODE returned 25.79% vs -36.43% for CBTJ. Their 0.66 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. Both charge a 0.69% expense ratio.

Performance

NODE vs. CBTJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Onchain Economy ETF (NODE) 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, NODE achieves a 7.73% return, which is significantly higher than CBTJ's -19.65% return.

NODE

• 1D: -2.28%
• 1M: -7.11%
• 6M: -1.11%
• YTD: 7.73%
• 1Y: 25.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 33.91%

CBTJ

• 1D: -1.43%
• 1M: -0.15%
• 6M: -15.00%
• YTD: -19.65%
• 1Y: -36.43%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -20.42%

*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)
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	$84.52K	$173.79K	$339.97K
NODE VanEck Onchain Economy ETF	$281.15K	$306.49K	$518.92K

NODE vs. CBTJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NODE VanEck Onchain Economy ETF	7.73%	32.27%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-19.65%	-15.35%

Correlation

The correlation between NODE and CBTJ is 0.66, 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.	0.66
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2025	0.66

The correlation between NODE and CBTJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NODE vs. CBTJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

NODE

NODE Risk / Return Rank: 22
NODE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 20
NODE Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
NODE Omega Ratio Rank: 23
NODE Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
NODE Martin Ratio Rank: 20

CBTJ

CBTJ Risk / Return Rank: 1
CBTJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
CBTJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
CBTJ Omega Ratio Rank: 0
CBTJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

NODE vs. CBTJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Onchain Economy ETF (NODE) 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.

	NODE	CBTJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.40	-1.43	+1.83
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.90	-2.15	+3.04
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	0.76	+0.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	-0.90	+1.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.19	-1.33	+2.52

NODE vs. CBTJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NODE Sharpe Ratio is 0.40, which is higher than the CBTJ Sharpe Ratio of -1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NODE 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

NODE vs. CBTJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NODE drawdown since its inception was -35.35%, smaller than the maximum CBTJ drawdown of -42.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NODE and CBTJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	NODE	CBTJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-35.35%	-42.41%	+7.06%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-35.35%	-42.41%	+7.06%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-21.12%	-41.36%	+20.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.37%	-17.82%	+6.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.88%	28.63%	-11.75%

Volatility

NODE vs. CBTJ - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Onchain Economy ETF (NODE) has a higher volatility of 20.06% compared to Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) at 4.03%. This indicates that NODE'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

	NODE	CBTJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	20.06%	4.03%	+16.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.93%	13.94%	+24.99%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.60%	26.64%	+23.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.18%	24.70%	+22.48%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.18%	24.70%	+22.48%

NODE vs. CBTJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both NODE and CBTJ have an expense ratio of 0.69%.

Dividends

NODE vs. CBTJ - Dividend Comparison

NODE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than CBTJ's 1.80% yield.

Position	TTM	2025
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.80%	1.45%
NODE VanEck Onchain Economy ETF	1.04%	1.12%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NODE and CBTJ in my portfolio?

NODE and CBTJ have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NODE or CBTJ?

NODE has higher volatility (20.06%) compared to CBTJ (4.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NODE dropped -35.35% vs CBTJ's -42.41%.

Which ETF is better, NODE or CBTJ?

On 1-year performance, NODE leads with 25.79% vs -36.43% for CBTJ. Both ETFs have the same 0.69% expense ratio. On volatility, CBTJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NODE or CBTJ?

Over the 1-year period, NODE has performed better with a 25.79% return vs -36.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NODE or CBTJ?

NODE and CBTJ have the same expense ratio: 0.69% per year.

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

CBTJ has the higher dividend yield at 1.80%, compared with 1.04% for NODE.

What is the main difference between NODE and CBTJ?

They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Calamos.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NODE currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.40 vs -1.43), 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.