CPRO vs IVV
Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - October vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, CPRO or IVV?
Option Writing against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV 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 | CPRO | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $26M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 5 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +5.57% | +12.39%Best |
| 1Y Return | +7.58% | +16.61%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.38% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.51% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 3.9%Best | 12.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -3.4%Best | -18.8% |
| $10,000 over 2 years | $11,565 | $13,802Best |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Option Writing | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Oct 1, 2024 | May 15, 2000 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 18, 2026 (2 years).
CPRO vs IVV 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 2 years both funds cover.
CPRO vs IVV Performance
Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - October (CPRO) is an ETF from Calamos Investments and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CPRO returned +7.58% while IVV returned +16.61%. Year to date, CPRO is up 5.57% versus a gain of 12.39% for IVV.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.8% compared with 3.9% for CPRO. 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 -3.4% for CPRO and -18.8% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CPRO charges 0.69% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $3 annually, a gap of $66 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CPRO currently yields 0.00% against 1.06% for IVV.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CPRO and IVV 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, CPRO or IVV?
CPRO has an expense ratio of 0.69% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $66 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CPRO or IVV?
Over the past year CPRO returned +7.58% vs +16.61% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), CPRO annualized +7.54% vs +17.48% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CPRO or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 12.8% annualized versus 3.9% for CPRO. Worst drawdown: CPRO -3.4% vs IVV -18.8%.
Should I hold both CPRO and IVV?
CPRO and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, 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, CPRO or IVV?
CPRO yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than CPRO?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV 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.