CHW vs LCR
Calamos Global Dynamic Income Fund vs Leuthold Core ETF
Which is better, CHW or LCR?
Each has led over a different period.
LCR has a lower expense ratio. CHW led over 1Y, LCR over the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CHW | LCR |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.27% | 0.83%Best |
| AUM | $854M | $66M |
| Dividend Yield | 2.18% | 1.30% |
| Holdings | 775 | 68 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 26.0% | 10.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -54.0% | -17.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,621 | $14,558Best |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | Leuthold Funds |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Allocation/Balanced |
| Style | Allocation/Balanced | Allocation/Balanced |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2007 | Jan 3, 2020 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
The two price series end 635 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. CHW has data through Oct 14, 2026 and LCR through Jan 17, 2025.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 5 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 6, 2020 to Jan 17, 2025 (5 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CHW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 26.0% compared with 10.1% for LCR. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -54.0% for CHW and -17.4% for LCR. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.84. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CHW charges 2.27% per year while LCR charges 0.83%. On a $10,000 position that is $227 vs $83 annually, a gap of $144 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CHW currently yields 2.18% against 1.30% for LCR.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 498 holdings in CHW and 33 in LCR, totalling 87.9% and 95.5% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
The two holdings books were reported 243 days apart, CHW as of Jan 31, 2026 and LCR as of Oct 1, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
0 positions in common, counted across the 498 positions we hold weights for in CHW and 33 in LCR, against full books of 775 and 68.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CHW and LCR you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CHW or LCR?
CHW has an expense ratio of 2.27% while LCR charges 0.83%. LCR is the cheaper option, by $144 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, CHW or LCR?
CHW has been the more volatile fund at 26.0% annualized versus 10.1% for LCR. Worst drawdown: CHW -54.0% vs LCR -17.4%.
Should I hold both CHW and LCR?
CHW and LCR have a monthly-return correlation of 0.84, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, CHW or LCR?
CHW yields 2.18% while LCR yields 1.30%, so CHW currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LCR better than CHW?
LCR has a lower expense ratio. CHW led over 1Y, LCR over the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.