BCDF vs. NVIR

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BCDF (Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF) and NVIR (Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCDF is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Horizon, while NVIR is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by Horizon. Both are actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BCDF returned 14.27%/yr vs 18.14%/yr for NVIR. At a 0.41 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 0.85% expense ratio.

Performance

BCDF vs. NVIR - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF (BCDF) and Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF (NVIR). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCDF achieves a -0.20% return, which is significantly lower than NVIR's 16.27% return.

BCDF

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: -10.70%
• YTD: -0.20%
• 6M: -0.65%
• 1Y: 2.52%
• 3Y*: 14.27%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

NVIR

• 1D: 1.46%
• 1M: -6.37%
• YTD: 16.27%
• 6M: 16.60%
• 1Y: 25.22%
• 3Y*: 18.14%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCDF vs. NVIR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BCDF Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF	-0.20%	11.63%	14.87%	17.17%
NVIR Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF	16.27%	9.84%	17.53%	5.23%

Correlation

The correlation between BCDF and NVIR is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.23
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 22, 2023	0.41

The correlation between BCDF and NVIR shifts across timeframes, from 0.23 (1 year) to 0.41 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BCDF vs. NVIR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCDF

BCDF Risk / Return Rank: 10
BCDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
BCDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
BCDF Omega Ratio Rank: 10
BCDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
BCDF Martin Ratio Rank: 11

NVIR

NVIR Risk / Return Rank: 48
NVIR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
NVIR Sortino Ratio Rank: 42
NVIR Omega Ratio Rank: 42
NVIR Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
NVIR Martin Ratio Rank: 53

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.

BCDF vs. NVIR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF (BCDF) and Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF (NVIR). 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.

	BCDF	NVIR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.17	1.52	-1.36
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.34	2.06	-1.72
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.04	1.26	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.24	2.79	-2.55
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.66	8.99	-8.33

BCDF vs. NVIR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCDF Sharpe Ratio is 0.17, which is lower than the NVIR Sharpe Ratio of 1.52. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCDF and NVIR, 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

BCDF vs. NVIR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCDF drawdown since its inception was -27.70%, which is greater than NVIR's maximum drawdown of -22.47%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCDF and NVIR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCDF	NVIR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-27.70%	-22.47%	-5.23%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.70%	-9.09%	-1.61%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.46%	-22.47%	+9.01%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-10.70%	-7.77%	-2.93%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-9.80%	-4.60%	-5.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.81%	2.82%	+0.99%

Volatility

BCDF vs. NVIR - Volatility Comparison

Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF (BCDF) and Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF (NVIR) have volatilities of 5.90% and 6.20%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCDF	NVIR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.90%	6.20%	-0.30%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.42%	12.78%	-1.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.16%	16.66%	-1.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.95%	19.33%	-2.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.95%	19.33%	-2.38%

BCDF vs. NVIR - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BCDF and NVIR have an expense ratio of 0.85%.

Dividends

BCDF vs. NVIR - Dividend Comparison

BCDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.53%, more than NVIR's 0.79% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BCDF Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF	2.53%	2.53%	1.63%	0.69%	0.38%
NVIR Horizon Kinetics Energy Remediation ETF	0.79%	0.92%	1.50%	1.34%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCDF and NVIR in my portfolio?

BCDF and NVIR have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BCDF or NVIR?

NVIR has higher volatility (6.20%) compared to BCDF (5.90%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCDF dropped -27.70% vs NVIR's -22.47%.

Which ETF is better, BCDF or NVIR?

On 3-year performance, NVIR leads with 18.14% vs 14.27% for BCDF. Both ETFs have the same 0.85% expense ratio. On volatility, BCDF has been the lower-risk option at 5.90%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCDF or NVIR?

Over the 3-year period, NVIR has performed better with a 18.14% return vs 14.27%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCDF or NVIR?

BCDF and NVIR have the same expense ratio: 0.85% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCDF or NVIR?

BCDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.53%, compared with 0.79% for NVIR.

What is the main difference between BCDF and NVIR?

BCDF is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while NVIR is Energy Equities.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

NVIR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.52 vs 0.17), 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.