ASMU vs. BCI

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

ASMU (Direxion Daily ASML Bull 2X ETF) and BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ASMU is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Direxion, while BCI is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return. ASMU is actively managed, while BCI is passively managed. Their -0.18 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. ASMU charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.26%/yr for BCI.

Performance

ASMU vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Direxion Daily ASML Bull 2X ETF (ASMU) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

ASMU

• 1D: -2.65%
• 1M: -17.30%
• 6M: —
• YTD: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: —

BCI

• 1D: -0.21%
• 1M: 7.31%
• 6M: 10.17%
• YTD: 22.53%
• 1Y: 35.51%
• 3Y*: 11.89%
• 5Y*: 10.01%
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 7.06%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
ASMU Direxion Daily ASML Bull 2X ETF	$4.73M	$6.77M	$4.71M
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	$33.67M	$55.32M	$39.13M

ASMU vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
ASMU Direxion Daily ASML Bull 2X ETF	7.22%
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	13.52%

Correlation

The correlation between ASMU and BCI is -0.18, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2026	-0.18

Return for Risk

ASMU vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

ASMU

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

BCI

BCI Risk / Return Rank: 76
BCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 85
BCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 80
BCI Omega Ratio Rank: 82
BCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
BCI Martin Ratio Rank: 63

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

ASMU vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Direxion Daily ASML Bull 2X ETF (ASMU) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	ASMU	BCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	—	2.00	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	—	2.60	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	—	1.35	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	—	2.37	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	—	7.60	—

Drawdowns

ASMU vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASMU drawdown since its inception was -41.09%, which is greater than BCI's maximum drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASMU and BCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASMU	BCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.09%	-32.69%	-8.40%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-14.82%	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-14.82%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.50%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-35.18%	-7.64%	-27.54%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.22%	-11.96%	-2.26%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	4.61%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	ASMU	BCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.02%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	15.08%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	106.89%	17.55%	+89.34%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	106.89%	16.85%	+90.04%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	106.89%	15.68%	+91.21%

ASMU vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASMU has a 0.97% expense ratio, which is higher than BCI's 0.26% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASMU vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

ASMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.67%, less than BCI's 13.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
ASMU Direxion Daily ASML Bull 2X ETF	0.67%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	13.46%	16.49%	3.29%	3.93%	19.98%	19.43%	0.68%	1.47%	1.13%	5.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASMU and BCI in my portfolio?

ASMU and BCI have a correlation of -0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, ASMU or BCI?

On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.26% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASMU or BCI?

BCI is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for ASMU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ASMU or BCI?

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.46%, compared with 0.67% for ASMU.

What is the main difference between ASMU and BCI?

ASMU is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BCI is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Direxion and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.97% for ASMU and 0.26% for BCI.