BCCC vs. BTCZ

Last updated Jul 11, 2026

BCCC (Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF) and BTCZ (T-Rex 2X Inverse Bitcoin Daily Target ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BCCC returned -34.03% vs 98.25% for BTCZ. At a correlation of -0.98, they often move in opposite directions. BCCC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BTCZ.

Performance

BCCC vs. BTCZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) and T-Rex 2X Inverse Bitcoin Daily Target ETF (BTCZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCCC achieves a -22.30% return, which is significantly lower than BTCZ's 32.07% return.

BCCC

• 1D: 0.25%
• 1M: 1.59%
• 6M: -24.48%
• YTD: -22.30%
• 1Y: -34.03%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BTCZ

• 1D: -2.20%
• 1M: -3.97%
• 6M: 42.20%
• YTD: 32.07%
• 1Y: 98.25%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCCC vs. BTCZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCCC Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF	-22.30%	-7.02%
BTCZ T-Rex 2X Inverse Bitcoin Daily Target ETF	32.07%	17.45%

Correlation

The correlation between BCCC and BTCZ is -0.98, 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 (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.98
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2025	-0.98

The correlation between BCCC and BTCZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from -0.98 to -0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BCCC vs. BTCZ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BCCC

BCCC Risk / Return Rank: 2
BCCC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
BCCC Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
BCCC Omega Ratio Rank: 2
BCCC Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
BCCC Martin Ratio Rank: 2

BTCZ

BTCZ Risk / Return Rank: 36
BTCZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
BTCZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
BTCZ Omega Ratio Rank: 36
BTCZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 41
BTCZ Martin Ratio Rank: 32

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BCCC vs. BTCZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) and T-Rex 2X Inverse Bitcoin Daily Target ETF (BTCZ). 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.

	BCCC	BTCZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.92	0.93	-1.85
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.21	1.67	-2.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.85	1.20	-0.35
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.78	1.68	-2.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.34	3.78	-5.12

BCCC vs. BTCZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCCC Sharpe Ratio is -0.92, which is lower than the BTCZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCCC and BTCZ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BCCC vs. BTCZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCCC drawdown since its inception was -41.79%, smaller than the maximum BTCZ drawdown of -91.06%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCCC and BTCZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCCC	BTCZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.79%	-91.06%	+49.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.79%	-49.02%	+7.23%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.90%	-78.70%	+40.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.82%	-73.75%	+54.93%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	24.46%	21.87%	+2.59%

Volatility

BCCC vs. BTCZ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) is 7.93%, while T-Rex 2X Inverse Bitcoin Daily Target ETF (BTCZ) has a volatility of 22.40%. This indicates that BCCC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BTCZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCCC	BTCZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.93%	22.40%	-14.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	29.17%	68.86%	-39.69%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.57%	89.07%	-53.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	34.79%	96.54%	-61.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.79%	96.54%	-61.75%

BCCC vs. BTCZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCCC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than BTCZ's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCCC vs. BTCZ - Dividend Comparison

BCCC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 61.96%, more than BTCZ's 0.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BCCC Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF	61.96%	29.55%	0.00%
BTCZ T-Rex 2X Inverse Bitcoin Daily Target ETF	0.01%	0.02%	0.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCCC and BTCZ in my portfolio?

BCCC and BTCZ have a correlation of -0.98, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BCCC or BTCZ?

BTCZ has higher volatility (22.40%) compared to BCCC (7.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCCC dropped -41.79% vs BTCZ's -91.06%.

Which ETF is better, BCCC or BTCZ?

On 1-year performance, BTCZ leads with 98.25% vs -34.03% for BCCC. On fees, BCCC is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, BCCC has been the lower-risk option at 7.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCCC or BTCZ?

Over the 1-year period, BTCZ has performed better with a 98.25% return vs -34.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCCC or BTCZ?

BCCC is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BTCZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCCC or BTCZ?

BCCC has the higher dividend yield at 61.96%, compared with 0.01% for BTCZ.

What is the main difference between BCCC and BTCZ?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and T-Rex. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for BCCC and 0.95% for BTCZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BTCZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.93 vs -0.92), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.