PRXV vs. CPNQ

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

PRXV (Praxis Impact Large Cap Value ETF) and CPNQ (Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December) are both exchange-traded funds - PRXV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Praxis, while CPNQ is a Defined Outcome fund actively managed by Calamos. Both are actively managed. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PRXV charges 0.36%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CPNQ.

Performance

PRXV vs. CPNQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Praxis Impact Large Cap Value ETF (PRXV) and Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December (CPNQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

PRXV

• 1D: 0.83%
• 1M: 3.80%
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CPNQ

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 3.07%
• 6M: 3.17%
• 1Y: 8.63%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

PRXV vs. CPNQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
PRXV Praxis Impact Large Cap Value ETF	6.85%
CPNQ Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December	1.60%

Correlation

The correlation between PRXV and CPNQ is 0.41, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 20, 2026	0.41

Return for Risk

PRXV vs. CPNQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

PRXV

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

CPNQ

CPNQ Risk / Return Rank: 94
CPNQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 93
CPNQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CPNQ Omega Ratio Rank: 94
CPNQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 91
CPNQ Martin Ratio Rank: 95

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.

PRXV vs. CPNQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Praxis Impact Large Cap Value ETF (PRXV) and Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - December (CPNQ). 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.

	PRXV	CPNQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	3.19	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	5.23	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.68	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	5.72	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	27.62	—

Drawdowns

PRXV vs. CPNQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PRXV drawdown since its inception was -1.41%, smaller than the maximum CPNQ drawdown of -3.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRXV and CPNQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	PRXV	CPNQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.41%	-3.52%	+2.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-1.52%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.15%	+0.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.41%	-0.42%	+0.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	0.31%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	PRXV	CPNQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	0.90%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	2.23%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.71%	2.72%	+7.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.71%	3.38%	+7.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.71%	3.38%	+7.33%

PRXV vs. CPNQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

PRXV has a 0.36% expense ratio, which is lower than CPNQ's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

PRXV vs. CPNQ - Dividend Comparison

Neither PRXV nor CPNQ has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PRXV and CPNQ in my portfolio?

PRXV and CPNQ have a correlation of 0.41, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, PRXV or CPNQ?

On fees, PRXV is cheaper at 0.36% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, PRXV or CPNQ?

PRXV is cheaper with a 0.36% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CPNQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, PRXV or CPNQ?

PRXV and CPNQ have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between PRXV and CPNQ?

PRXV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while CPNQ is Defined Outcome. They also come from different issuers: Praxis and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.36% for PRXV and 0.69% for CPNQ.