CPRA vs QQQ
Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, CPRA or QQQ?
Multi Alternative against Large Cap Growth.
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ 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 | CPRA | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $13M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 5 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +4.80% | +21.71%Best |
| 1Y Return | +6.89% | +25.89%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +28.80% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.67% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 1.6%Best | 19.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -1.7%Best | -12.6% |
| $10,000 over 1.5 years | $11,230 | $15,923Best |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Apr 1, 2025 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.5 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 1, 2025 to Sep 25, 2026 (1.5 years).
CPRA vs QQQ 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 1.5 years both funds cover.
CPRA vs QQQ Performance
Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - April (CPRA) is an ETF from Calamos Investments and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year CPRA returned +6.89% while QQQ returned +25.89%. Year to date, CPRA is up 4.80% versus a gain of 21.71% for QQQ.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QQQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.6% compared with 1.6% for CPRA. 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 -1.7% for CPRA and -12.6% for QQQ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.58. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CPRA charges 0.69% per year while QQQ charges 0.18%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $18 annually, a gap of $51 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CPRA currently yields 0.00% against 0.44% for QQQ.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CPRA and QQQ 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, CPRA or QQQ?
CPRA has an expense ratio of 0.69% while QQQ charges 0.18%. QQQ is the cheaper option, by $51 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CPRA or QQQ?
Over the past year CPRA returned +6.89% vs +25.89% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), CPRA annualized +8.04% vs +36.36% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CPRA or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.6% annualized versus 1.6% for CPRA. Worst drawdown: CPRA -1.7% vs QQQ -12.6%.
Should I hold both CPRA and QQQ?
CPRA and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.58, 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, CPRA or QQQ?
CPRA yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than CPRA?
QQQ has a lower expense ratio. QQQ 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.