ASMU vs. BCI
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. At a correlation of -0.26, they often move in opposite directions. ASMU charges 0.97%/yr vs 0.26%/yr for BCI.
Performance
ASMU vs. BCI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
ASMU
- 1D
- -8.10%
- 1M
- -17.67%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BCI
- 1D
- 1.54%
- 1M
- -0.15%
- 6M
- 15.17%
- YTD
- 19.53%
- 1Y
- 28.14%
- 3Y*
- 11.87%
- 5Y*
- 9.92%
- 10Y*
- —
ASMU vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
ASMU Direxion Daily ASML Bull 2X ETF | 22.71% |
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 10.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between ASMU and BCI is -0.26, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 11, 2026 | -0.26 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ASMU vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank
ASMU
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BCI
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 ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.29 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.91 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.39 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ASMU vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ASMU drawdown since its inception was -34.79%, 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.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ASMU | BCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.79% | -32.69% | -2.10% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -25.82% | -9.90% | -15.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.54% | -11.99% | -0.55% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 4.42% | — |
Volatility
ASMU vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ASMU | BCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.62% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 14.99% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 107.45% | 17.32% | +90.13% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 107.45% | 16.83% | +90.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 107.45% | 15.66% | +91.79% |
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 0.59%, less than BCI's 13.79% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ASMU Direxion Daily ASML Bull 2X ETF | 0.59% | 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 | 13.79% | 16.49% | 3.29% | 3.93% | 19.98% | 19.43% | 0.68% | 1.47% | 1.13% | 5.02% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ASMU and BCI have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
BCI is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 0.97% for ASMU.
BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.79%, compared with 0.59% for ASMU.
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.
Find the right allocation for ASMU and BCI
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer