BCHS.L vs. BLKC

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BCHS.L (Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc) and BLKC (Invesco Alerian Galaxy Blockchain Users and Decentralized Commerce ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCHS.L is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, while BLKC is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Alerian Galaxy Global Cryptocurrency-Focused Blockchain Equity, Trusts and ETPs Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BCHS.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for BLKC.

Performance

BCHS.L vs. BLKC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc (BCHS.L) and Invesco Alerian Galaxy Blockchain Users and Decentralized Commerce ETF (BLKC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

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

Returns By Period

BCHS.L

• 1D: -1.63%
• 1M: 10.46%
• YTD: 26.66%
• 6M: 16.86%
• 1Y: 61.41%
• 3Y*: 42.48%
• 5Y*: 12.62%
• 10Y*: —

BLKC

• 1D: —
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCHS.L vs. BLKC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BCHS.L Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc	26.66%	35.24%	18.50%	58.28%	-46.25%	-0.39%
BLKC Invesco Alerian Galaxy Blockchain Users and Decentralized Commerce ETF	-12.58%	5.69%	49.39%	117.40%	-59.08%	-7.57%

Correlation

The correlation between BCHS.L and BLKC is 0.50, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.56
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 8, 2021	0.59

The correlation between BCHS.L and BLKC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.50 to 0.59 - a consistent structural relationship.

BCHS.L vs. BLKC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BCHS.L	BLKC
Financial Services	57.4%	36.7%
Technology	30.6%	29.5%
Consumer Cyclical	6.4%	7.3%
Communication Services	3.9%	4.5%
Utilities	1.2%	-
Industrials	0.5%	2.2%
Healthcare	0.0%	1.0%
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	2.6%
Basic Materials	0.0%	-
Energy	0.0%	1.4%
Real Estate	0.0%	-

Return for Risk

BCHS.L vs. BLKC — Risk / Return Rank

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

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.

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

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc (BCHS.L) and Invesco Alerian Galaxy Blockchain Users and Decentralized Commerce ETF (BLKC). 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.

	BCHS.L	BLKC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.63	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.19	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.07	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.20	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BCHS.L	BLKC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.63	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.35	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.71	—	—

Drawdowns

Drawdown Indicators

	BCHS.L	BLKC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-55.89%	—	—
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.49%	—	—
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.64%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-55.89%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.94%	—	—
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.40%	—	—
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	14.57%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BCHS.L	BLKC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.49%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.68%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	37.46%	—	—
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.61%	—	—
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	34.37%	—	—

BCHS.L vs. BLKC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCHS.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than BLKC's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCHS.L vs. BLKC - Dividend Comparison

BCHS.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BLKC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.39%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BCHS.L Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BLKC Invesco Alerian Galaxy Blockchain Users and Decentralized Commerce ETF	4.39%	7.72%	19.66%	1.92%	5.40%	0.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

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

BCHS.L and BLKC have a correlation of 0.50, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BCHS.L or BLKC?

On fees, BLKC is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCHS.L or BLKC?

BLKC is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BCHS.L.

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

BCHS.L is categorized as Technology Equities, while BLKC is Cryptocurrency. BCHS.L tracks MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, while BLKC tracks Alerian Galaxy Global Cryptocurrency-Focused Blockchain Equity, Trusts and ETPs Index. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BCHS.L and 0.60% for BLKC.