BCD vs. FLAU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BCD (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF) and FLAU (Franklin FTSE Australia ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCD is a Commodities fund actively managed by Aberdeen, while FLAU is a Asia Pacific Equities fund tracking the FTSE Australia RIC Capped Index. BCD is actively managed, while FLAU is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BCD returned 11.98%/yr vs 5.98%/yr for FLAU. At a 0.37 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BCD charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for FLAU.

Performance

BCD vs. FLAU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCD) and Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCD achieves a 20.45% return, which is significantly higher than FLAU's 10.47% return.

BCD

• 1D: -0.16%
• 1M: -1.43%
• YTD: 20.45%
• 6M: 20.51%
• 1Y: 31.80%
• 3Y*: 14.44%
• 5Y*: 11.98%
• 10Y*: —

FLAU

• 1D: -1.17%
• 1M: 1.12%
• YTD: 10.47%
• 6M: 12.59%
• 1Y: 16.61%
• 3Y*: 12.97%
• 5Y*: 5.98%
• 10Y*: —

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

BCD vs. FLAU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF	20.45%	15.71%	6.20%	-7.58%	18.38%	31.87%	4.76%	7.34%	-8.65%	-0.54%
FLAU Franklin FTSE Australia ETF	10.47%	15.95%	1.81%	12.58%	-5.58%	9.90%	11.00%	23.38%	-10.17%	1.89%

Correlation

The correlation between BCD and FLAU is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.29
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.38
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 7, 2017	0.37

Over the past year, the correlation between BCD and FLAU has dropped to 0.11 - well below their long-term average of 0.37, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

Return for Risk

BCD vs. FLAU — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCD

BCD Risk / Return Rank: 71
BCD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
BCD Sortino Ratio Rank: 64
BCD Omega Ratio Rank: 70
BCD Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
BCD Martin Ratio Rank: 68

FLAU

FLAU Risk / Return Rank: 29
FLAU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 27
FLAU Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
FLAU Omega Ratio Rank: 26
FLAU Calmar Ratio Rank: 34
FLAU Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

BCD vs. FLAU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCD) and Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU). 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.

	BCD	FLAU	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.33	1.00	+1.33
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.02	1.47	+1.56
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.18	+0.25
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.42	1.67	+2.76
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	12.57	5.15	+7.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BCD vs. FLAU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCD Sharpe Ratio is 2.33, which is higher than the FLAU Sharpe Ratio of 1.00. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCD and FLAU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BCD	FLAU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.33	1.00	+1.33
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.78	0.31	+0.48
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.67	0.33	+0.34

Drawdowns

BCD vs. FLAU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCD drawdown since its inception was -29.81%, smaller than the maximum FLAU drawdown of -45.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCD and FLAU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCD	FLAU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.81%	-45.73%	+15.92%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.22%	-10.01%	+2.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.50%	-22.03%	+11.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.03%	-24.68%	+1.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.60%	-3.11%	-0.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.86%	-6.79%	-3.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.54%	3.23%	-0.69%

Volatility

BCD vs. FLAU - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCD) is 4.33%, while Franklin FTSE Australia ETF (FLAU) has a volatility of 5.45%. This indicates that BCD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FLAU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCD	FLAU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.33%	5.45%	-1.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.74%	13.66%	-1.92%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.72%	16.63%	-2.91%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.41%	19.61%	-4.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.90%	23.58%	-9.68%

BCD vs. FLAU - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCD has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than FLAU's 0.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCD vs. FLAU - Dividend Comparison

BCD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.29%, more than FLAU's 2.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF	14.29%	17.21%	3.60%	4.51%	5.21%	8.30%	1.29%	1.55%	1.59%	0.07%
FLAU Franklin FTSE Australia ETF	2.94%	3.25%	3.37%	3.62%	5.91%	5.14%	2.18%	4.37%	4.34%	0.18%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCD and FLAU in my portfolio?

BCD and FLAU have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BCD or FLAU?

FLAU has higher volatility (5.45%) compared to BCD (4.33%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCD dropped -29.81% vs FLAU's -45.73%.

Which ETF is better, BCD or FLAU?

On 5-year performance, BCD leads with 11.98% vs 5.98% for FLAU. On fees, FLAU is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, BCD has been the lower-risk option at 4.33%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCD or FLAU?

Over the 5-year period, BCD has performed better with a 11.98% return vs 5.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCD or FLAU?

FLAU is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for BCD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCD or FLAU?

BCD has the higher dividend yield at 14.29%, compared with 2.94% for FLAU.

What is the main difference between BCD and FLAU?

BCD is categorized as Commodities, while FLAU is Asia Pacific Equities. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for BCD and 0.09% for FLAU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BCD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.33 vs 1.00), 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.