PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QBF vs. CBXJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QBF vs. CBXJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) and Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBXJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBF achieves a -21.94% return, which is significantly lower than CBXJ's -9.51% return.


QBF

1D
-4.78%
1M
-11.03%
YTD
-21.94%
6M
-25.72%
1Y
-33.63%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

CBXJ

1D
-1.70%
1M
-5.16%
YTD
-9.51%
6M
-13.76%
1Y
-19.73%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QBF vs. CBXJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between QBF and CBXJ is 0.96 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2025

0.95

The correlation between QBF and CBXJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.96 - 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

QBF vs. CBXJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QBF
QBF Risk / Return Rank: 11
Overall Rank
QBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 00
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
QBF Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
QBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
Calmar Ratio Rank
QBF Martin Ratio Rank: 22
Martin Ratio Rank

CBXJ
CBXJ Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
CBXJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CBXJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
CBXJ Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
CBXJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
CBXJ Martin Ratio Rank: 33
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.

QBF vs. CBXJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) and Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBXJ). 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.


QBFCBXJDifference

Sharpe ratio

Return per unit of total volatility

-1.28

-1.10

-0.18

Sortino ratio

Return per unit of downside risk

-1.88

-1.50

-0.38

Omega ratio

Gain probability vs. loss probability

0.80

0.83

-0.03

Calmar ratio

Return relative to maximum drawdown

-0.81

-0.72

-0.09

Martin ratio

Return relative to average drawdown

-1.40

-1.16

-0.24

QBF vs. CBXJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QBF Sharpe Ratio is -1.28, which is comparable to the CBXJ Sharpe Ratio of -1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QBF and CBXJ, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


QBFCBXJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-1.28

-1.10

-0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.93

-0.76

-0.16

Drawdowns

QBF vs. CBXJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBF drawdown since its inception was -41.65%, which is greater than CBXJ's maximum drawdown of -27.61%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBF and CBXJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QBFCBXJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.65%

-27.61%

-14.04%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-41.65%

-27.61%

-14.04%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-41.65%

-27.52%

-14.13%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-16.74%

-10.63%

-6.11%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

24.05%

17.01%

+7.04%

Volatility

QBF vs. CBXJ - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) has a higher volatility of 7.29% compared to Calamos Bitcoin 90 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBXJ) at 3.03%. This indicates that QBF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBXJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QBFCBXJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.29%

3.03%

+4.26%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

18.57%

12.44%

+6.13%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.29%

17.93%

+8.36%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

28.52%

16.72%

+11.80%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

28.52%

16.72%

+11.80%

QBF vs. CBXJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

QBF has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CBXJ's 0.69% expense ratio.


Dividends

QBF vs. CBXJ - Dividend Comparison

QBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.77%, less than CBXJ's 2.18% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.96, QBF and CBXJ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

QBF has higher volatility (7.29%) compared to CBXJ (3.03%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBF dropped -41.65% vs CBXJ's -27.61%.

On 1-year performance, CBXJ leads with -19.73% vs -33.63% for QBF. On fees, CBXJ is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CBXJ has been the lower-risk option at 3.03%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, CBXJ has performed better with a -19.73% return vs -33.63%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

CBXJ is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBF.

CBXJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.18%, compared with 1.77% for QBF.

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QBF and 0.69% for CBXJ.

CBXJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-1.10 vs -1.28), 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 QBF and CBXJ

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