RTH vs. CSQ

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

RTH (VanEck Vectors Retail ETF) and CSQ (Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund) are both funds - RTH is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index, while CSQ is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Calamos. RTH is passively managed, while CSQ is actively managed. Over the past 10 years, RTH returned 14.35%/yr vs 16.38%/yr for CSQ. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RTH charges 0.35%/yr vs 2.46%/yr for CSQ.

Performance

RTH vs. CSQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RTH achieves a 4.33% return, which is significantly lower than CSQ's 8.10% return. Over the past 10 years, RTH has underperformed CSQ with an annualized return of 14.35%, while CSQ has yielded a comparatively higher 16.38% annualized return.

RTH

• 1D: -0.06%
• 1M: -1.59%
• YTD: 4.33%
• 6M: 2.84%
• 1Y: 12.87%
• 3Y*: 16.16%
• 5Y*: 9.69%
• 10Y*: 14.35%

CSQ

• 1D: 1.27%
• 1M: -1.20%
• YTD: 8.10%
• 6M: 9.75%
• 1Y: 24.17%
• 3Y*: 20.54%
• 5Y*: 10.41%
• 10Y*: 16.38%

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

RTH vs. CSQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	4.33%	12.36%	20.02%	20.07%	-17.67%	24.94%	31.62%	29.06%	3.87%	22.45%
CSQ Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund	8.10%	16.25%	28.11%	20.80%	-24.26%	30.77%	26.22%	38.62%	-4.89%	27.98%

Correlation

The correlation between RTH and CSQ is 0.47, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.47
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.58
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.67
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 1, 2004	0.57

The correlation between RTH and CSQ shifts across timeframes, from 0.47 (1 year) to 0.67 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

RTH vs. CSQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

RTH

RTH Risk / Return Rank: 32
RTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
RTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 32
RTH Omega Ratio Rank: 29
RTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
RTH Martin Ratio Rank: 36

CSQ

CSQ Risk / Return Rank: 36
CSQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
CSQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
CSQ Omega Ratio Rank: 41
CSQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 25
CSQ Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

RTH vs. CSQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) and Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ). 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.

	RTH	CSQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	1.51	-0.54
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.52	2.06	-0.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.18	1.27	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.50	1.49	+0.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.99	6.36	-1.37

RTH vs. CSQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTH Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the CSQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTH and CSQ, 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

RTH vs. CSQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTH drawdown since its inception was -42.32%, smaller than the maximum CSQ drawdown of -67.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTH and CSQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	RTH	CSQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.32%	-67.17%	+24.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.83%	-15.25%	+7.42%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.80%	-24.18%	+10.38%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.00%	-33.09%	+8.09%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-25.00%	-48.21%	+23.21%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.58%	-2.35%	-1.23%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.34%	-9.33%	+1.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.35%	3.58%	-1.23%

Volatility

RTH vs. CSQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) is 3.85%, while Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund (CSQ) has a volatility of 5.74%. This indicates that RTH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CSQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RTH	CSQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.85%	5.74%	-1.89%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.28%	12.45%	-3.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.09%	15.06%	-2.97%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.81%	20.06%	-3.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.54%	23.02%	-5.48%

RTH vs. CSQ - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than CSQ's 2.46% expense ratio.

Dividends

RTH vs. CSQ - Dividend Comparison

RTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.93%, less than CSQ's 6.72% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CSQ Calamos Strategic Total Return Fund	6.72%	6.51%	6.95%	8.27%	9.17%	6.38%	7.03%	7.14%	9.35%	8.20%	9.64%	10.00%
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF	0.93%	0.97%	0.77%	1.07%	1.16%	0.78%	0.64%	0.91%	1.05%	1.56%	1.84%	2.25%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RTH and CSQ in my portfolio?

RTH and CSQ have a correlation of 0.47, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RTH or CSQ?

CSQ has higher volatility (5.74%) compared to RTH (3.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RTH dropped -42.32% vs CSQ's -67.17%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CSQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs 0.97), 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.