BCI vs. BYLD
BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) and BYLD (iShares Yield Optimized Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCI is a Commodities fund actively managed by Aberdeen, while BYLD is a Intermediate Core-Plus Bond fund tracking the Morningstar U.S. Bond Market Yield-Optimized Index. BCI is actively managed, while BYLD is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BCI returned 11.07%/yr vs 2.21%/yr for BYLD. At a 0.07 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BCI charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.17%/yr for BYLD.
Performance
BCI vs. BYLD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BCI achieves a 26.68% return, which is significantly higher than BYLD's 1.23% return.
BCI
- 1D
- -0.12%
- 1M
- -3.06%
- YTD
- 26.68%
- 6M
- 25.55%
- 1Y
- 38.68%
- 3Y*
- 15.96%
- 5Y*
- 11.07%
- 10Y*
- —
BYLD
- 1D
- -0.18%
- 1M
- 0.61%
- YTD
- 1.23%
- 6M
- 1.35%
- 1Y
- 7.01%
- 3Y*
- 6.49%
- 5Y*
- 2.21%
- 10Y*
- 3.01%
BCI vs. BYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 26.68% | 15.07% | 5.47% | -8.79% | 15.09% | 26.18% | -2.77% | 7.06% | -11.21% | 2.94% |
BYLD iShares Yield Optimized Bond ETF | 1.23% | 8.41% | 4.17% | 8.30% | -10.33% | -1.25% | 4.25% | 12.79% | -1.50% | 3.38% |
Correlation
The correlation between BCI and BYLD is -0.29, 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 | -0.29 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.02 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.03 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2017 | 0.07 |
The correlation between BCI and BYLD shifts across timeframes, from -0.29 (1 year) to 0.07 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
BCI vs. BYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BCI
BYLD
Financial Services
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
BCI
BYLD
-
Basic Materials
BCI
-
BYLD
-
Communication Services
BCI
-
BYLD
-
Consumer Cyclical
BCI
-
BYLD
-
Consumer Defensive
BCI
-
BYLD
-
Energy
BCI
-
BYLD
Healthcare
BCI
-
BYLD
-
Industrials
BCI
-
BYLD
-
Real Estate
BCI
-
BYLD
Technology
BCI
-
BYLD
-
Utilities
BCI
-
BYLD
-
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
BCI vs. BYLD — Risk / Return Rank
BCI
BYLD
BCI vs. BYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) and iShares Yield Optimized Bond ETF (BYLD). 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.
| BCI | BYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.30 | 1.85 | +0.45 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 2.92 | 2.76 | +0.16 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.41 | 1.35 | +0.07 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.10 | 2.60 | +2.51 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.14 | 10.54 | +2.60 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BCI | BYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.30 | 1.85 | +0.45 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.66 | 0.43 | +0.23 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.56 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.48 | 0.57 | -0.09 |
Drawdowns
BCI vs. BYLD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BCI drawdown since its inception was -32.69%, which is greater than BYLD's maximum drawdown of -14.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCI and BYLD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BCI | BYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.69% | -14.75% | -17.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.61% | -2.71% | -4.90% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -11.38% | -3.94% | -7.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.50% | -14.65% | -11.85% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -14.75% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -4.52% | -0.34% | -4.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -12.00% | -2.51% | -9.49% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.95% | 0.67% | +2.28% |
Volatility
BCI vs. BYLD - Volatility Comparison
abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a higher volatility of 5.16% compared to iShares Yield Optimized Bond ETF (BYLD) at 1.42%. This indicates that BCI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BCI | BYLD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.16% | 1.42% | +3.74% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.80% | 2.94% | +11.86% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.92% | 3.82% | +13.10% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.82% | 5.20% | +11.62% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.65% | 5.43% | +10.22% |
BCI vs. BYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison
BCI has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than BYLD's 0.17% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
BCI vs. BYLD - Dividend Comparison
BCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.01%, more than BYLD's 5.36% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 13.01% | 16.49% | 3.29% | 3.93% | 19.98% | 19.43% | 0.68% | 1.47% | 1.13% | 5.02% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
BYLD iShares Yield Optimized Bond ETF | 5.36% | 5.32% | 5.31% | 4.45% | 3.39% | 2.18% | 3.41% | 3.67% | 4.22% | 3.22% | 3.14% | 3.37% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BCI and BYLD have a correlation of -0.29, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BCI has higher volatility (5.16%) compared to BYLD (1.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCI dropped -32.69% vs BYLD's -14.75%.
On 5-year performance, BCI leads with 11.07% vs 2.21% for BYLD. On fees, BYLD is cheaper at 0.17% per year. On volatility, BYLD has been the lower-risk option at 1.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, BCI has performed better with a 11.07% return vs 2.21%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BYLD is cheaper with a 0.17% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for BCI.
BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 5.36% for BYLD.
BCI is categorized as Commodities, while BYLD is Intermediate Core-Plus Bond. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for BCI and 0.17% for BYLD.
BCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.85), 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.
Find the right allocation for BCI and BYLD
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