BCFN vs. OILK
BCFN (Baron Financials ETF) and OILK (ProShares K-1 Free Crude Oil Strategy ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCFN is a Financials Equities fund tracking the Actively Managed, while OILK is a Oil & Gas fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index. Both are passively managed. At a correlation of -0.22, they often move in opposite directions. BCFN charges 0.80%/yr vs 0.68%/yr for OILK.
Performance
BCFN vs. OILK - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BCFN achieves a -14.62% return, which is significantly lower than OILK's 40.78% return.
BCFN
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- 0.55%
- YTD
- -14.62%
- 6M
- -15.87%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
OILK
- 1D
- -0.59%
- 1M
- -13.38%
- YTD
- 40.78%
- 6M
- 38.63%
- 1Y
- 27.24%
- 3Y*
- 13.91%
- 5Y*
- 13.00%
- 10Y*
- —
BCFN vs. OILK - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BCFN Baron Financials ETF | -14.62% | -0.45% |
OILK ProShares K-1 Free Crude Oil Strategy ETF | 40.78% | 0.03% |
Correlation
The correlation between BCFN and OILK 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2025 | -0.22 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
BCFN vs. OILK — Risk / Return Rank
BCFN
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
OILK
BCFN vs. OILK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Baron Financials ETF (BCFN) and ProShares K-1 Free Crude Oil Strategy ETF (OILK). 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.
| BCFN | OILK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.18 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.57 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 3.49 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BCFN vs. OILK - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BCFN drawdown since its inception was -20.95%, smaller than the maximum OILK drawdown of -83.76%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCFN and OILK.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BCFN | OILK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -20.95% | -83.76% | +62.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -17.41% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.42% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -34.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -16.74% | -17.41% | +0.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.60% | -32.48% | +19.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 7.86% | — |
Volatility
BCFN vs. OILK - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BCFN | OILK | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.02% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 24.07% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 18.97% | 29.00% | -10.03% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 18.97% | 30.27% | -11.30% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.97% | 35.96% | -16.99% |
BCFN vs. OILK - Expense Ratio Comparison
BCFN has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than OILK's 0.68% expense ratio.
Dividends
BCFN vs. OILK - Dividend Comparison
BCFN has not paid dividends to shareholders, while OILK's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.54%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCFN Baron Financials ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
OILK ProShares K-1 Free Crude Oil Strategy ETF | 9.54% | 4.79% | 3.11% | 5.80% | 17.32% | 68.82% | 0.13% | 0.94% | 0.58% | 6.17% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BCFN and OILK 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.
On fees, OILK is cheaper at 0.68% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
OILK is cheaper with a 0.68% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for BCFN.
OILK has the higher dividend yield at 9.54%, compared with 0.00% for BCFN.
BCFN is categorized as Financials Equities, while OILK is Oil & Gas. BCFN tracks Actively Managed, while OILK tracks Bloomberg Commodity Balanced WTI Crude Oil Index. They also come from different issuers: Baron Capital and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for BCFN and 0.68% for OILK.
Find the right allocation for BCFN and OILK
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer