PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BCGS vs. NZAC
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BCGS vs. NZAC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bancreek Global Select ETF (BCGS) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period


BCGS

1D
-0.75%
1M
2.63%
YTD
6M
1Y
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

NZAC

1D
-0.82%
1M
4.49%
YTD
8.83%
6M
9.51%
1Y
24.74%
3Y*
19.06%
5Y*
9.88%
10Y*
12.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BCGS vs. NZAC - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BCGS and NZAC is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 10, 2026

0.91

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

BCGS vs. NZAC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCGS

NZAC
NZAC Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
NZAC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
NZAC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
NZAC Omega Ratio Rank: 5555
Omega Ratio Rank
NZAC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
NZAC Martin Ratio Rank: 6060
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BCGS vs. NZAC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bancreek Global Select ETF (BCGS) and SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF (NZAC). 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.


Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

BCGS vs. NZAC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BCGSNZACDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.92

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.59

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.71

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.39

0.61

+0.77

Drawdowns

BCGS vs. NZAC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCGS drawdown since its inception was -7.43%, smaller than the maximum NZAC drawdown of -33.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCGS and NZAC.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BCGSNZACDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-7.43%

-33.72%

+26.29%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.10%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.19%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-28.31%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.72%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.25%

-0.82%

-1.43%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.24%

-5.32%

+3.08%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.32%

Volatility

BCGS vs. NZAC - Volatility Comparison


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BCGSNZACDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.72%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

10.34%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

21.77%

12.94%

+8.83%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.77%

16.81%

+4.96%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.77%

17.14%

+4.63%

BCGS vs. NZAC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCGS has a 0.80% expense ratio, which is higher than NZAC's 0.12% expense ratio.


Dividends

BCGS vs. NZAC - Dividend Comparison

BCGS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than NZAC's 2.04% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BCGS
Bancreek Global Select ETF
0.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
NZAC
SPDR MSCI ACWI Climate Paris Aligned ETF
2.04%1.90%1.88%1.65%1.81%1.62%1.59%2.17%2.53%2.20%2.00%2.40%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, BCGS and NZAC 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.

On fees, NZAC is cheaper at 0.12% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

NZAC is cheaper with a 0.12% expense ratio, compared with 0.80% for BCGS.

NZAC has the higher dividend yield at 2.04%, compared with 0.02% for BCGS.

They also come from different issuers: Bancreek and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.80% for BCGS and 0.12% for NZAC.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BCGS and NZAC

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