BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BCHN.L (Invesco Elwood Global Blockchain Ucits ETF) and BCHS.L (Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc) are both Technology Equities funds from Invesco tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BCHN.L returned 11.36%/yr vs 11.44%/yr for BCHS.L. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.65% expense ratio.

Performance

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Elwood Global Blockchain Ucits ETF (BCHN.L) and Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc (BCHS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

BCHN.L is traded in USD, while BCHS.L is traded in GBp. To make them comparable, the BCHS.L values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with BCHN.L having a 25.82% return and BCHS.L slightly higher at 26.35%.

BCHN.L

• 1D: -2.12%
• 1M: 10.57%
• YTD: 25.82%
• 6M: 16.47%
• 1Y: 61.23%
• 3Y*: 45.96%
• 5Y*: 11.36%
• 10Y*: —

BCHS.L

• 1D: -1.58%
• 1M: 9.52%
• YTD: 26.35%
• 6M: 17.73%
• 1Y: 59.87%
• 3Y*: 46.15%
• 5Y*: 11.44%
• 10Y*: —

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

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BCHN.L Invesco Elwood Global Blockchain Ucits ETF	25.82%	45.50%	17.30%	66.38%	-52.02%	23.97%	96.43%	14.24%
BCHS.L Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc	26.35%	45.45%	16.53%	66.63%	-52.00%	24.86%	94.85%	14.79%

Correlation

The correlation between BCHN.L and BCHS.L is 0.93, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 13, 2019	0.94

The correlation between BCHN.L and BCHS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BCHN.L	BCHS.L
Financial Services	53.0%	57.4%
Technology	32.8%	30.6%
Consumer Cyclical	7.6%	6.4%
Communication Services	4.1%	3.9%
Utilities	1.8%	1.2%
Industrials	0.7%	0.5%
Basic Materials	-	0.0%
Consumer Defensive	-	0.0%
Energy	-	0.0%
Healthcare	-	0.0%
Real Estate	-	0.0%

Return for Risk

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCHN.L

BCHN.L Risk / Return Rank: 39
BCHN.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
BCHN.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
BCHN.L Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BCHN.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
BCHN.L Martin Ratio Rank: 29

BCHS.L

BCHS.L Risk / Return Rank: 41
BCHS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
BCHS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
BCHS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 41
BCHS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BCHS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Elwood Global Blockchain Ucits ETF (BCHN.L) and Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc (BCHS.L). 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.

	BCHN.L	BCHS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.50	1.55	-0.05
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.13	2.14	-0.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.25	0.00
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.93	1.96	-0.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.05	4.10	-0.06
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCHN.L Sharpe Ratio is 1.50, which is comparable to the BCHS.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.55. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCHN.L and BCHS.L, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BCHN.L	BCHS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.50	1.55	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	0.31	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.66	0.69	-0.03

Drawdowns

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCHN.L drawdown since its inception was -61.69%, roughly equal to the maximum BCHS.L drawdown of -61.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCHN.L and BCHS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCHN.L	BCHS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-61.69%	-61.43%	-0.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-31.54%	-30.45%	-1.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-36.39%	-35.24%	-1.15%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-61.11%	-60.92%	-0.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.60%	-4.17%	-0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-23.68%	-24.18%	+0.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	15.09%	14.55%	+0.54%

Volatility

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Elwood Global Blockchain Ucits ETF (BCHN.L) has a higher volatility of 11.58% compared to Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc (BCHS.L) at 10.94%. This indicates that BCHN.L's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BCHS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCHN.L	BCHS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.58%	10.94%	+0.64%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	26.89%	25.92%	+0.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.59%	38.45%	+2.14%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	38.82%	37.35%	+1.47%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.68%	36.12%	+0.56%

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BCHN.L and BCHS.L have an expense ratio of 0.65%.

Dividends

BCHN.L vs. BCHS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither BCHN.L nor BCHS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCHN.L and BCHS.L in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, BCHN.L and BCHS.L 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.

Which ETF is better, BCHN.L or BCHS.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.65% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCHN.L or BCHS.L?

BCHN.L and BCHS.L have the same expense ratio: 0.65% per year.

What is the main difference between BCHN.L and BCHS.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD.