BCD vs. SLDR

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

BCD (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF) and SLDR (Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCD is a Commodities fund actively managed by Aberdeen, while SLDR is a Government Bonds fund tracking the FTSE US Treasury 1-3 Years Laddered Bond Index. BCD is actively managed, while SLDR is passively managed. Over the past year, BCD returned 23.43% vs 2.79% for SLDR. At a correlation of -0.16, they often move in opposite directions. BCD charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.12%/yr for SLDR.

Performance

BCD vs. SLDR - 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 Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (SLDR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCD achieves a 15.08% return, which is significantly higher than SLDR's 0.64% return.

BCD

• 1D: -0.95%
• 1M: 0.68%
• 6M: 10.82%
• YTD: 15.08%
• 1Y: 23.43%
• 3Y*: 11.38%
• 5Y*: 10.91%
• 10Y*: —

SLDR

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.14%
• 6M: 0.54%
• YTD: 0.64%
• 1Y: 2.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCD vs. SLDR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF	15.08%	15.71%	5.48%
SLDR Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF	0.64%	4.60%	0.66%

Correlation

The correlation between BCD and SLDR is -0.22, 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	-0.22
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 10, 2024	-0.16

Return for Risk

BCD vs. SLDR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCD

BCD Risk / Return Rank: 55
BCD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
BCD Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
BCD Omega Ratio Rank: 62
BCD Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
BCD Martin Ratio Rank: 47

SLDR

SLDR Risk / Return Rank: 84
SLDR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 82
SLDR Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
SLDR Omega Ratio Rank: 92
SLDR Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
SLDR Martin Ratio Rank: 79

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. SLDR - 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 Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (SLDR). 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.

	BCD	SLDR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.66	2.11	-0.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.24	3.20	-0.96
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.49	-0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.85	3.21	-1.36
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.23	11.88	-5.65

BCD vs. SLDR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCD Sharpe Ratio is 1.66, which is comparable to the SLDR Sharpe Ratio of 2.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCD and SLDR, 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

BCD vs. SLDR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCD drawdown since its inception was -29.81%, which is greater than SLDR's maximum drawdown of -0.87%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCD and SLDR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCD	SLDR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.81%	-0.87%	-28.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.70%	-0.87%	-11.83%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.70%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-23.03%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-7.89%	-0.08%	-7.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.84%	-0.14%	-9.70%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.77%	0.24%	+3.53%

Volatility

BCD vs. SLDR - Volatility Comparison

abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCD) has a higher volatility of 4.34% compared to Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF (SLDR) at 0.58%. This indicates that BCD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SLDR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCD	SLDR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.34%	0.58%	+3.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.99%	0.99%	+11.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.15%	1.35%	+12.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.40%	1.28%	+14.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.91%	1.28%	+12.63%

BCD vs. SLDR - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCD has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than SLDR's 0.12% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCD vs. SLDR - Dividend Comparison

BCD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.96%, more than SLDR's 3.69% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF	14.96%	17.21%	3.60%	4.51%	5.21%	8.30%	1.29%	1.55%	1.59%	0.07%
SLDR Global X Short-Term Treasury Ladder ETF	3.69%	3.80%	0.98%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCD and SLDR in my portfolio?

BCD and SLDR have a correlation of -0.22, 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 SLDR?

BCD has higher volatility (4.34%) compared to SLDR (0.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCD dropped -29.81% vs SLDR's -0.87%.

Which ETF is better, BCD or SLDR?

On 1-year performance, BCD leads with 23.43% vs 2.79% for SLDR. On fees, SLDR is cheaper at 0.12% per year. On volatility, SLDR has been the lower-risk option at 0.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCD or SLDR?

Over the 1-year period, BCD has performed better with a 23.43% return vs 2.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCD or SLDR?

SLDR is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for BCD.

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

BCD has the higher dividend yield at 14.96%, compared with 3.69% for SLDR.

What is the main difference between BCD and SLDR?

BCD is categorized as Commodities, while SLDR is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and Global X. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for BCD and 0.12% for SLDR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SLDR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.66), 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.