BCHI vs. CAOS

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BCHI (GMO Beyond China ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCHI is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund actively managed by GMO, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BCHI returned 64.74% vs 1.64% for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.35, they often move in opposite directions. BCHI charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.

Performance

BCHI vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCHI achieves a 35.93% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.75% return.

BCHI

• 1D: -0.82%
• 1M: 6.18%
• YTD: 35.93%
• 6M: 37.59%
• 1Y: 64.74%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

CAOS

• 1D: 0.11%
• 1M: -0.08%
• YTD: 0.75%
• 6M: 0.67%
• 1Y: 1.64%
• 3Y*: 3.95%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCHI vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF	35.93%	26.33%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.75%	2.20%

Correlation

The correlation between BCHI and CAOS is -0.28, 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	-0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 13, 2025	-0.35

Return for Risk

BCHI vs. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCHI

BCHI Risk / Return Rank: 88
BCHI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 91
BCHI Sortino Ratio Rank: 87
BCHI Omega Ratio Rank: 90
BCHI Calmar Ratio Rank: 86
BCHI Martin Ratio Rank: 87

CAOS

CAOS Risk / Return Rank: 36
CAOS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 31
CAOS Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
CAOS Omega Ratio Rank: 35
CAOS Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
CAOS Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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.

BCHI vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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.

	BCHI	CAOS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.98	1.10	+1.88
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.77	1.75	+2.03
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.55	1.23	+0.32
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.60	2.17	+2.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.73	5.23	+12.50

BCHI vs. CAOS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCHI Sharpe Ratio is 2.98, which is higher than the CAOS Sharpe Ratio of 1.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCHI and CAOS, 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

BCHI vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCHI drawdown since its inception was -14.33%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCHI and CAOS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCHI	CAOS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.33%	-3.89%	-10.44%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.14%	-0.76%	-13.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-3.60%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.09%	-1.14%	+0.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.26%	-0.92%	-1.34%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.66%	0.32%	+3.34%

Volatility

BCHI vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison

GMO Beyond China ETF (BCHI) has a higher volatility of 11.10% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.32%. This indicates that BCHI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCHI	CAOS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.10%	0.32%	+10.78%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.96%	1.05%	+18.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.88%	1.50%	+20.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.77%	4.23%	+17.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.77%	4.23%	+17.54%

BCHI vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCHI has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCHI vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison

BCHI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.70%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025
BCHI GMO Beyond China ETF	2.70%	3.67%
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCHI and CAOS in my portfolio?

BCHI and CAOS have a correlation of -0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BCHI or CAOS?

BCHI has higher volatility (11.10%) compared to CAOS (0.32%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCHI dropped -14.33% vs CAOS's -3.89%.

Which ETF is better, BCHI or CAOS?

On 1-year performance, BCHI leads with 64.74% vs 1.64% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.32%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BCHI or CAOS?

Over the 1-year period, BCHI has performed better with a 64.74% return vs 1.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCHI or CAOS?

CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BCHI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCHI or CAOS?

BCHI has the higher dividend yield at 2.70%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.

What is the main difference between BCHI and CAOS?

BCHI is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: GMO and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BCHI and 0.63% for CAOS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BCHI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.98 vs 1.10), 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.