CPSN vs QQQ
Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - November vs Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1
Which is better, CPSN 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 | CPSN | QQQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.18%Best |
| AUM | $32M | $483.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 0.44% |
| Holdings | 5 | 107 |
| YTD Return | +4.53% | +17.21%Best |
| 1Y Return | +6.07% | +22.10%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +25.27% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +14.60% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 2.5%Best | 19.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -3.2%Best | -22.8% |
| $10,000 over 1.9 years | $11,235 | $14,918Best |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Nov 1, 2024 | Mar 10, 1999 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 1, 2024 to Sep 17, 2026 (1.9 years).
CPSN 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 1.9 years both funds cover.
CPSN vs QQQ Performance
Calamos S&P 500 Structured Alt Protection ETF - November (CPSN) is an ETF from Calamos Investments and Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 (QQQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year CPSN returned +6.07% while QQQ returned +22.10%. Year to date, CPSN is up 4.53% versus a gain of 17.21% 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 19.1% compared with 2.5% for CPSN. 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 -3.2% for CPSN and -22.8% 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 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CPSN 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, CPSN currently yields 0.00% against 0.44% for QQQ.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CPSN 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, CPSN or QQQ?
CPSN 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, CPSN or QQQ?
Over the past year CPSN returned +6.07% vs +22.10% for QQQ, so QQQ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), CPSN annualized +6.32% vs +23.43% for QQQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CPSN or QQQ?
QQQ has been the more volatile fund at 19.1% annualized versus 2.5% for CPSN. Worst drawdown: CPSN -3.2% vs QQQ -22.8%.
Should I hold both CPSN and QQQ?
CPSN and QQQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, 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, CPSN or QQQ?
CPSN yields 0.00% while QQQ yields 0.44%, so QQQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QQQ better than CPSN?
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.