TMAR vs. CPNS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) and CPNS (Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September) are both Defined Outcome funds - TMAR tracks the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return while CPNS tracks the MerQube Cap Protect US Large Cap Tech PR Index - Sep. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, TMAR returned 29.13% vs 7.68% for CPNS. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TMAR charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CPNS.

Performance

TMAR vs. CPNS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) and Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPNS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMAR achieves a 15.63% return, which is significantly higher than CPNS's 3.23% return.

TMAR

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 2.88%
• YTD: 15.63%
• 6M: 16.19%
• 1Y: 29.13%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CPNS

• 1D: 0.05%
• 1M: 0.34%
• YTD: 3.23%
• 6M: 3.17%
• 1Y: 7.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TMAR vs. CPNS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	15.63%	15.97%
CPNS Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September	3.23%	7.63%

Correlation

The correlation between TMAR and CPNS is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 24, 2025	0.56

The correlation between TMAR and CPNS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.56 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

TMAR vs. CPNS — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 92
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 95
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

CPNS

CPNS Risk / Return Rank: 95
CPNS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 95
CPNS Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
CPNS Omega Ratio Rank: 96
CPNS Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
CPNS Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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.

TMAR vs. CPNS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) and Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPNS). 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.

	TMAR	CPNS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.78	3.63	-0.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.03	5.57	-1.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.70	1.81	-0.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.24	5.87	+0.37
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	31.24	31.74	-0.51

TMAR vs. CPNS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.78, which is comparable to the CPNS Sharpe Ratio of 3.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMAR and CPNS, 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

TMAR vs. CPNS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMAR drawdown since its inception was -9.93%, which is greater than CPNS's maximum drawdown of -3.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMAR and CPNS.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMAR	CPNS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.93%	-3.99%	-5.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.69%	-1.31%	-3.38%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.01%	+0.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.71%	-0.36%	-0.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.93%	0.24%	+0.69%

Volatility

TMAR vs. CPNS - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a higher volatility of 5.53% compared to Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPNS) at 0.56%. This indicates that TMAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CPNS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMAR	CPNS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.53%	0.56%	+4.97%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.55%	1.75%	+7.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.55%	2.13%	+8.42%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.08%	3.51%	+8.57%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.08%	3.51%	+8.57%

TMAR vs. CPNS - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMAR has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than CPNS's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMAR vs. CPNS - Dividend Comparison

Neither TMAR nor CPNS has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMAR and CPNS in my portfolio?

TMAR and CPNS have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMAR or CPNS?

TMAR has higher volatility (5.53%) compared to CPNS (0.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMAR dropped -9.93% vs CPNS's -3.99%.

Which ETF is better, TMAR or CPNS?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 29.13% vs 7.68% for CPNS. On fees, CPNS is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CPNS has been the lower-risk option at 0.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMAR or CPNS?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 29.13% return vs 7.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMAR or CPNS?

CPNS is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for TMAR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, TMAR or CPNS?

TMAR and CPNS have nearly identical dividend yields, around 0.00%.

What is the main difference between TMAR and CPNS?

TMAR tracks iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return, while CPNS tracks MerQube Cap Protect US Large Cap Tech PR Index - Sep. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for TMAR and 0.69% for CPNS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CPNS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.63 vs 2.78), 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.