BCCC vs. SIL

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BCCC (Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF) and SIL (Global X Silver Miners ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCCC is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Global X, while SIL is a Silver fund tracking the Solactive Global Silver Miners Total Return Index. BCCC is actively managed, while SIL is passively managed. Over the past year, BCCC returned -28.91% vs 65.33% for SIL. At a 0.27 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BCCC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for SIL.

Performance

BCCC vs. SIL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) and Global X Silver Miners ETF (SIL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCCC achieves a -23.44% return, which is significantly lower than SIL's -5.97% return.

BCCC

• 1D: -1.69%
• 1M: -14.48%
• YTD: -23.44%
• 6M: -22.51%
• 1Y: -28.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SIL

• 1D: -5.47%
• 1M: -10.87%
• YTD: -5.97%
• 6M: -10.24%
• 1Y: 65.33%
• 3Y*: 47.37%
• 5Y*: 13.84%
• 10Y*: 8.64%

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

BCCC vs. SIL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCCC Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF	-23.44%	-7.02%
SIL Global X Silver Miners ETF	-5.97%	82.55%

Correlation

The correlation between BCCC and SIL is 0.30, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.30
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2025	0.27

Return for Risk

BCCC vs. SIL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCCC

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

SIL

SIL Risk / Return Rank: 35
SIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
SIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 33
SIL Omega Ratio Rank: 35
SIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 37
SIL 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. SIL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) and Global X Silver Miners ETF (SIL). 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	SIL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.82	1.25	-2.07
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.03	1.69	-2.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.23	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.70	1.77	-2.47
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.27	4.50	-5.76

BCCC vs. SIL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCCC Sharpe Ratio is -0.82, which is lower than the SIL Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCCC and SIL, 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. SIL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCCC drawdown since its inception was -41.63%, smaller than the maximum SIL drawdown of -82.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCCC and SIL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCCC	SIL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.63%	-82.99%	+41.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.63%	-37.08%	-4.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-37.08%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-49.48%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-63.04%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.81%	-33.47%	-5.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.87%	-51.37%	+33.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	22.86%	14.58%	+8.28%

Volatility

BCCC vs. SIL - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) is 10.66%, while Global X Silver Miners ETF (SIL) has a volatility of 19.47%. This indicates that BCCC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SIL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCCC	SIL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.66%	19.47%	-8.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.99%	44.45%	-15.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.32%	52.59%	-17.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.04%	39.84%	-4.80%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.04%	39.90%	-4.86%

BCCC vs. SIL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCCC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than SIL's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCCC vs. SIL - Dividend Comparison

BCCC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 63.85%, more than SIL's 1.26% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BCCC Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF	63.85%	29.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SIL Global X Silver Miners ETF	1.26%	1.18%	2.40%	0.59%	0.48%	1.59%	1.92%	1.53%	1.21%	0.02%	3.34%	0.38%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCCC and SIL in my portfolio?

BCCC and SIL have a correlation of 0.30, 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 SIL?

SIL has higher volatility (19.47%) compared to BCCC (10.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCCC dropped -41.63% vs SIL's -82.99%.

Which ETF is better, BCCC or SIL?

On 1-year performance, SIL leads with 65.33% vs -28.91% for BCCC. On fees, SIL is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, BCCC has been the lower-risk option at 10.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCCC or SIL?

Over the 1-year period, SIL has performed better with a 65.33% return vs -28.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCCC or SIL?

SIL is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for BCCC.

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

BCCC has the higher dividend yield at 63.85%, compared with 1.26% for SIL.

What is the main difference between BCCC and SIL?

BCCC is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while SIL is Silver. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for BCCC and 0.65% for SIL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SIL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.25 vs -0.82), 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.