BCI vs. COMB
BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) and COMB (GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF) are both Commodities funds. BCI is passively managed, while COMB is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BCI returned 9.52%/yr vs 9.61%/yr for COMB. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BCI charges 0.26%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for COMB.
Performance
BCI vs. COMB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with BCI having a 15.26% return and COMB slightly lower at 14.97%.
BCI
- 1D
- -1.23%
- 1M
- -9.78%
- YTD
- 15.26%
- 6M
- 13.54%
- 1Y
- 23.04%
- 3Y*
- 11.40%
- 5Y*
- 9.52%
- 10Y*
- —
COMB
- 1D
- -1.41%
- 1M
- -9.91%
- YTD
- 14.97%
- 6M
- 13.14%
- 1Y
- 22.62%
- 3Y*
- 11.57%
- 5Y*
- 9.61%
- 10Y*
- —
BCI vs. COMB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 15.26% | 15.07% | 5.47% | -8.79% | 15.09% | 26.18% | -2.77% | 7.06% | -11.21% | 4.10% |
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 14.97% | 15.12% | 5.24% | -7.75% | 14.56% | 26.34% | -2.95% | 7.02% | -11.41% | 4.98% |
Correlation
The correlation between BCI and COMB is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.99 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.98 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 24, 2017 | 0.95 |
The correlation between BCI and COMB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.95 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.
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. COMB — Risk / Return Rank
BCI
COMB
BCI vs. COMB - 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 GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB). 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.
| BCI | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.04 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.05 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.24 | +0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.76 | 1.71 | +0.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.95 | 6.79 | +0.16 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BCI vs. COMB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BCI drawdown since its inception was -32.69%, roughly equal to the maximum COMB drawdown of -33.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCI and COMB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BCI | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.69% | -33.50% | +0.81% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.12% | -13.28% | +0.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.12% | -13.28% | +0.16% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.50% | -26.63% | +0.13% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.12% | -13.28% | +0.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.99% | -12.04% | +0.05% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.34% | 3.36% | -0.02% |
Volatility
BCI vs. COMB - Volatility Comparison
abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) and GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF (COMB) have volatilities of 3.55% and 3.69%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BCI | COMB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.55% | 3.69% | -0.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.98% | 15.24% | -0.26% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.20% | 17.34% | -0.14% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.79% | 16.69% | +0.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.65% | 15.14% | +0.51% |
BCI vs. COMB - Expense Ratio Comparison
BCI has a 0.26% expense ratio, which is higher than COMB's 0.25% 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. COMB - Dividend Comparison
BCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.30%, more than COMB's 7.87% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 14.30% | 16.49% | 3.29% | 3.93% | 19.98% | 19.43% | 0.68% | 1.47% | 1.13% | 5.02% |
COMB GraniteShares Bloomberg Commodity Broad Strategy No K-1 ETF | 7.87% | 9.05% | 2.48% | 6.57% | 30.85% | 15.83% | 0.07% | 1.48% | 0.97% | 0.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.99, BCI and COMB 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.
COMB has higher volatility (3.69%) compared to BCI (3.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCI dropped -32.69% vs COMB's -33.50%.
On 5-year performance, COMB leads with 9.61% vs 9.52% for BCI. On fees, COMB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, BCI has been the lower-risk option at 3.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, COMB has performed better with a 9.61% return vs 9.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
COMB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.26% for BCI.
BCI has the higher dividend yield at 14.30%, compared with 7.87% for COMB.
They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and GraniteShares. Their fees differ too: 0.26% for BCI and 0.25% for COMB.
BCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 1.32), 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 COMB
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