BCCC vs. USFR

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BCCC (Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF) and USFR (WisdomTree Floating Rate Treasury Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - BCCC is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Global X, while USFR is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Floating Rate Bond Index. BCCC is actively managed, while USFR is passively managed. Over the past year, BCCC returned -27.47% vs 3.97% for USFR. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. BCCC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for USFR.

Performance

BCCC vs. USFR - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCCC achieves a -22.13% return, which is significantly lower than USFR's 1.78% return.

BCCC

• 1D: 1.83%
• 1M: -13.01%
• YTD: -22.13%
• 6M: -21.74%
• 1Y: -27.47%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

USFR

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.29%
• YTD: 1.78%
• 6M: 1.89%
• 1Y: 3.97%
• 3Y*: 4.72%
• 5Y*: 3.70%
• 10Y*: 2.43%

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

BCCC vs. USFR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCCC Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF	-22.13%	-7.02%
USFR WisdomTree Floating Rate Treasury Fund	1.78%	2.39%

Correlation

The correlation between BCCC and USFR is -0.10, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2025	-0.09

Return for Risk

BCCC vs. USFR — 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

USFR

USFR Risk / Return Rank: 100
USFR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
USFR Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
USFR Omega Ratio Rank: 100
USFR Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
USFR Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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. USFR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) and WisdomTree Floating Rate Treasury Fund (USFR). 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	USFR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.78	14.65	-15.43
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.95	49.88	-50.83
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.88	13.24	-12.37
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.66	200.29	-200.96
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.21	775.73	-776.95

BCCC vs. USFR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCCC Sharpe Ratio is -0.78, which is lower than the USFR Sharpe Ratio of 14.65. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCCC and USFR, 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. USFR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCCC drawdown since its inception was -41.63%, which is greater than USFR's maximum drawdown of -1.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCCC and USFR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCCC	USFR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.63%	-1.36%	-40.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.63%	-0.02%	-41.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.06%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-0.18%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-0.80%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-37.76%	0.00%	-37.76%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.79%	-0.15%	-17.64%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	22.73%	0.01%	+22.72%

Volatility

BCCC vs. USFR - Volatility Comparison

Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) has a higher volatility of 10.69% compared to WisdomTree Floating Rate Treasury Fund (USFR) at 0.08%. This indicates that BCCC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than USFR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCCC	USFR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.69%	0.08%	+10.61%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.96%	0.19%	+28.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.36%	0.27%	+35.09%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.08%	0.40%	+34.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.08%	0.78%	+34.30%

BCCC vs. USFR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCCC has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than USFR's 0.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCCC vs. USFR - Dividend Comparison

BCCC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 64.45%, more than USFR's 3.91% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BCCC Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF	64.45%	29.55%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
USFR WisdomTree Floating Rate Treasury Fund	3.91%	4.15%	5.17%	5.12%	1.78%	0.01%	0.40%	2.08%	1.67%	1.03%	0.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCCC and USFR in my portfolio?

BCCC and USFR have a correlation of -0.10, 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 USFR?

BCCC has higher volatility (10.69%) compared to USFR (0.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCCC dropped -41.63% vs USFR's -1.36%.

Which ETF is better, BCCC or USFR?

On 1-year performance, USFR leads with 3.97% vs -27.47% for BCCC. On fees, USFR is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, USFR has been the lower-risk option at 0.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCCC or USFR?

Over the 1-year period, USFR has performed better with a 3.97% return vs -27.47%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCCC or USFR?

USFR is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for BCCC.

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

BCCC has the higher dividend yield at 64.45%, compared with 3.91% for USFR.

What is the main difference between BCCC and USFR?

BCCC is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while USFR is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Global X and WisdomTree. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for BCCC and 0.15% for USFR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

USFR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (14.65 vs -0.78), 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.