PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
PMAP vs. CPSL
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

PMAP vs. CPSL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) and Calamos Laddered S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF (CPSL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, PMAP achieves a 3.30% return, which is significantly higher than CPSL's 2.71% return.


PMAP

1D
-0.02%
1M
0.28%
YTD
3.30%
6M
3.61%
1Y
7.14%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CPSL

1D
0.11%
1M
0.49%
YTD
2.71%
6M
2.87%
1Y
7.13%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

PMAP vs. CPSL - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between PMAP and CPSL is 0.64, 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

0.64

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2025

0.70

The correlation between PMAP and CPSL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.70 - 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

PMAP vs. CPSL — Risk / Return Rank

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

PMAP
PMAP Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
PMAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9999
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PMAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
PMAP Omega Ratio Rank: 9999
Omega Ratio Rank
PMAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
PMAP Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank

CPSL
CPSL Risk / Return Rank: 9494
Overall Rank
CPSL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9494
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CPSL Sortino Ratio Rank: 9696
Sortino Ratio Rank
CPSL Omega Ratio Rank: 9494
Omega Ratio Rank
CPSL Calmar Ratio Rank: 9393
Calmar Ratio Rank
CPSL Martin Ratio Rank: 9696
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

PMAP vs. CPSL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) and Calamos Laddered S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF (CPSL). 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.


PMAPCPSLDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.87

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+7.15

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.78

1.64

+1.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

20.56

6.08

+14.48

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

111.65

30.72

+80.93

PMAP vs. CPSL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PMAP Sharpe Ratio is 6.08, which is higher than the CPSL Sharpe Ratio of 3.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PMAP and CPSL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

PMAP vs. CPSL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PMAP drawdown since its inception was -1.75%, smaller than the maximum CPSL drawdown of -3.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PMAP and CPSL.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


PMAPCPSLDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-1.75%

-3.72%

+1.97%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.35%

-1.18%

+0.83%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.09%

-0.10%

+0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.08%

-0.33%

+0.25%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.06%

0.23%

-0.17%

Volatility

PMAP vs. CPSL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for PGIM S&P 500 Max Buffer ETF - April (PMAP) is 0.41%, while Calamos Laddered S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF (CPSL) has a volatility of 0.55%. This indicates that PMAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CPSL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


PMAPCPSLDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.41%

0.55%

-0.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.89%

1.63%

-0.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.18%

2.24%

-1.06%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

2.31%

3.32%

-1.01%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

2.31%

3.32%

-1.01%

PMAP vs. CPSL - Expense Ratio Comparison

PMAP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CPSL's 0.79% expense ratio.


Dividends

PMAP vs. CPSL - Dividend Comparison

Neither PMAP nor CPSL has paid dividends to shareholders.


Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions


PMAP and CPSL have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CPSL has higher volatility (0.55%) compared to PMAP (0.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PMAP dropped -1.75% vs CPSL's -3.72%.

On 1-year performance, PMAP leads with 7.14% vs 7.13% for CPSL. On fees, PMAP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, PMAP has been the lower-risk option at 0.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, PMAP has performed better with a 7.14% return vs 7.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

PMAP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for CPSL.

PMAP and CPSL have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for PMAP and 0.79% for CPSL.

PMAP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.08 vs 3.20), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for PMAP and CPSL

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