BCCC vs. YBTC

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BCCC (Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF) and YBTC (Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BCCC returned -28.91% vs -36.92% for YBTC. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BCCC charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for YBTC.

Performance

BCCC vs. YBTC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) and Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF (YBTC). 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 higher than YBTC's -26.15% return.

BCCC

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

YBTC

• 1D: -2.45%
• 1M: -16.58%
• YTD: -26.15%
• 6M: -25.92%
• 1Y: -36.92%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCCC vs. YBTC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCCC Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF	-23.44%	-7.02%
YBTC Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF	-26.15%	-16.09%

Correlation

The correlation between BCCC and YBTC is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2025	0.94

The correlation between BCCC and YBTC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BCCC vs. YBTC — 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

YBTC

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

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. YBTC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) and Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF (YBTC). 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	YBTC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.82	-0.93	+0.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.03	-1.25	+0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	0.84	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.70	-0.76	+0.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.27	-1.33	+0.07

BCCC vs. YBTC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCCC Sharpe Ratio is -0.82, which is comparable to the YBTC Sharpe Ratio of -0.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCCC and YBTC, 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. YBTC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCCC drawdown since its inception was -41.63%, smaller than the maximum YBTC drawdown of -48.82%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCCC and YBTC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCCC	YBTC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.63%	-48.82%	+7.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.63%	-48.82%	+7.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-38.81%	-46.07%	+7.26%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.87%	-13.58%	-4.29%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	22.86%	27.69%	-4.83%

Volatility

BCCC vs. YBTC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF (BCCC) is 10.66%, while Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF (YBTC) has a volatility of 12.43%. This indicates that BCCC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than YBTC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCCC	YBTC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.66%	12.43%	-1.77%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.99%	32.04%	-3.05%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	35.32%	39.80%	-4.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.04%	40.90%	-5.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.04%	40.90%	-5.86%

BCCC vs. YBTC - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

BCCC vs. YBTC - Dividend Comparison

BCCC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 63.85%, less than YBTC's 89.41% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024
BCCC Global X Bitcoin Covered Call ETF	63.85%	29.55%	0.00%
YBTC Roundhill Bitcoin Covered Call Strategy ETF	89.41%	76.04%	44.53%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCCC and YBTC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, BCCC and YBTC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, BCCC or YBTC?

YBTC has higher volatility (12.43%) compared to BCCC (10.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCCC dropped -41.63% vs YBTC's -48.82%.

Which ETF is better, BCCC or YBTC?

On 1-year performance, BCCC leads with -28.91% vs -36.92% for YBTC. On fees, BCCC is cheaper at 0.75% 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 YBTC?

Over the 1-year period, BCCC has performed better with a -28.91% return vs -36.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCCC or YBTC?

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

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

YBTC has the higher dividend yield at 89.41%, compared with 63.85% for BCCC.

What is the main difference between BCCC and YBTC?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for BCCC and 0.95% for YBTC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BCCC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.82 vs -0.93), 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.