TMAR vs. CPST

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TMAR (FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March) and CPST (Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September) are both Defined Outcome funds - TMAR tracks the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return while CPST tracks the MerQube Cap Protect US Lrg Cap PR Index - Sep. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, TMAR returned 28.83% vs 7.61% for CPST. A 0.53 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. TMAR charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CPST.

Performance

TMAR vs. CPST - 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 S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPST). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, TMAR achieves a 14.45% return, which is significantly higher than CPST's 2.67% return.

TMAR

• 1D: -0.72%
• 1M: 2.73%
• YTD: 14.45%
• 6M: 15.92%
• 1Y: 28.83%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CPST

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.87%
• YTD: 2.67%
• 6M: 2.98%
• 1Y: 7.61%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TMAR vs. CPST - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
TMAR FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March	14.45%	14.71%
CPST Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September	2.67%	6.64%

Correlation

The correlation between TMAR and CPST is 0.57, 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	0.57
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 25, 2025	0.53

The correlation between TMAR and CPST has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.57 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

TMAR vs. CPST — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMAR

TMAR Risk / Return Rank: 94
TMAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
TMAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
TMAR Omega Ratio Rank: 96
TMAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 95
TMAR Martin Ratio Rank: 96

CPST

CPST Risk / Return Rank: 94
CPST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
CPST Sortino Ratio Rank: 97
CPST Omega Ratio Rank: 96
CPST Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
CPST 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.

TMAR vs. CPST - 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 S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPST). 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.

	TMAR	CPST	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	3.06	3.56	-0.50
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.63	5.91	-1.28
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.77	1.82	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	7.95	5.38	+2.57
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	38.42	28.97	+9.45
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TMAR vs. CPST - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMAR Sharpe Ratio is 3.06, which is comparable to the CPST Sharpe Ratio of 3.56. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMAR and CPST, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TMAR	CPST	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.06	3.56	-0.50
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.25	2.02	+0.23

Drawdowns

TMAR vs. CPST - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMAR drawdown since its inception was -9.93%, which is greater than CPST's maximum drawdown of -3.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMAR and CPST.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMAR	CPST	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-9.93%	-3.79%	-6.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.64%	-1.42%	-2.22%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.72%	0.00%	-0.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.66%	-0.35%	-0.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.75%	0.26%	+0.49%

Volatility

TMAR vs. CPST - Volatility Comparison

FT Vest Emerging Markets Buffer ETF - March (TMAR) has a higher volatility of 4.53% compared to Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - September (CPST) at 0.30%. This indicates that TMAR's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CPST based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	TMAR	CPST	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.53%	0.30%	+4.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.17%	1.60%	+6.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.47%	2.15%	+7.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.42%	3.37%	+8.05%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.42%	3.37%	+8.05%

TMAR vs. CPST - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

TMAR vs. CPST - Dividend Comparison

Neither TMAR nor CPST has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMAR and CPST in my portfolio?

TMAR and CPST have a correlation of 0.57, 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 CPST?

TMAR has higher volatility (4.53%) compared to CPST (0.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMAR dropped -9.93% vs CPST's -3.79%.

Which ETF is better, TMAR or CPST?

On 1-year performance, TMAR leads with 28.83% vs 7.61% for CPST. On fees, CPST is cheaper at 0.69% per year. On volatility, CPST has been the lower-risk option at 0.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TMAR or CPST?

Over the 1-year period, TMAR has performed better with a 28.83% return vs 7.61%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMAR or CPST?

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

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

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

What is the main difference between TMAR and CPST?

TMAR tracks iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) Price Return, while CPST tracks MerQube Cap Protect US Lrg Cap 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 CPST.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CPST currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.56 vs 3.06), 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.