CPNJ vs QCJA
Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - June vs FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January
Which is better, CPNJ or QCJA?
QCJA has been ahead.
CPNJ has a lower expense ratio. QCJA led over 1Y and 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 | CPNJ | QCJA |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69%Best | 0.90% |
| AUM | $45M | $75M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 5 | 10 |
| YTD Return | +2.95% | +8.70%Best |
| 1Y Return | +4.22% | +11.92%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 3.9%Best | 6.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -6.0%Best | -10.7% |
| $10,000 over 1.7 years | $11,045 | $12,002Best |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Alternative |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | Jun 3, 2024 | Jan 17, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 21, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.7 years).
CPNJ vs QCJA growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 1.7 years both funds cover.
CPNJ vs QCJA Performance
Calamos Nasdaq-100 Structured Alt Protection ETF - June (CPNJ) is an ETF from Calamos Investments and FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - January (QCJA) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year CPNJ returned +4.22% while QCJA returned +11.92%. Year to date, CPNJ is up 2.95% versus a gain of 8.70% for QCJA.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QCJA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 6.8% compared with 3.9% for CPNJ. 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 -6.0% for CPNJ and -10.7% for QCJA. 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
CPNJ charges 0.69% per year while QCJA charges 0.90%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $90 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CPNJ currently yields 0.00% against 0.00% for QCJA.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CPNJ and QCJA 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, CPNJ or QCJA?
CPNJ has an expense ratio of 0.69% while QCJA charges 0.90%. CPNJ is the cheaper option, by $21 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CPNJ or QCJA?
Over the past year CPNJ returned +4.22% vs +11.92% for QCJA, so QCJA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), CPNJ annualized +6.02% vs +11.33% for QCJA. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CPNJ or QCJA?
QCJA has been the more volatile fund at 6.8% annualized versus 3.9% for CPNJ. Worst drawdown: CPNJ -6.0% vs QCJA -10.7%.
Should I hold both CPNJ and QCJA?
CPNJ and QCJA 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, CPNJ or QCJA?
CPNJ yields 0.00% while QCJA yields 0.00%, so QCJA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QCJA better than CPNJ?
CPNJ has a lower expense ratio. QCJA led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.