QTJA vs. CBOX

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

QTJA (Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January) and CBOX (Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF) are both Options Trading funds. Both are actively managed. Their 0.03 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. QTJA charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.14%/yr for CBOX.

Performance

QTJA vs. CBOX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) and Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF (CBOX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

QTJA

• 1D: 0.85%
• 1M: 1.11%
• 6M: 9.16%
• YTD: 10.67%
• 1Y: 19.98%
• 3Y*: 17.23%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 5.59%

CBOX

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.38%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

*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)
CBOX Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF	$7.65M	$8.56M	$7.13M
QTJA Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January	$104.10K	$68.74K	$107.04K

QTJA vs. CBOX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
QTJA Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January	6.54%
CBOX Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF	1.14%

Correlation

The correlation between QTJA and CBOX is 0.03, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 17, 2026	0.03

Return for Risk

QTJA vs. CBOX — Risk / Return Rank

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

QTJA

QTJA Risk / Return Rank: 70
QTJA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
QTJA Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
QTJA Omega Ratio Rank: 78
QTJA Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
QTJA Martin Ratio Rank: 76

CBOX

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

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.

QTJA vs. CBOX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Growth Accelerated Plus ETF - January (QTJA) and Calamos Tax-Aware Collateral ETF (CBOX). 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.

	QTJA	CBOX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.75	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.52	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.35	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.06	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.40	—	—

Drawdowns

QTJA vs. CBOX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QTJA drawdown since its inception was -36.07%, which is greater than CBOX's maximum drawdown of -2.90%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QTJA and CBOX.

Drawdown Indicators

	QTJA	CBOX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.07%	-2.90%	-33.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.75%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.73%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-2.29%	+2.15%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.84%	-1.48%	-11.36%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.92%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	QTJA	CBOX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.49%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.40%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.50%	7.77%	+3.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.22%	7.77%	+12.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.22%	7.77%	+12.45%

QTJA vs. CBOX - Expense Ratio Comparison

QTJA has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than CBOX's 0.14% expense ratio.

Dividends

QTJA vs. CBOX - Dividend Comparison

Neither QTJA nor CBOX has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QTJA and CBOX in my portfolio?

QTJA and CBOX have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, QTJA or CBOX?

On fees, CBOX is cheaper at 0.14% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, QTJA or CBOX?

CBOX is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QTJA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QTJA or CBOX?

QTJA and CBOX have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between QTJA and CBOX?

They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QTJA and 0.14% for CBOX.