BCI vs. GSG
BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) and GSG (iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust) are both Commodities funds - BCI tracks the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return while GSG tracks the S&P GSCI Total Return Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BCI returned 9.52%/yr vs 12.78%/yr for GSG. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BCI charges 0.26%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GSG.
Performance
BCI vs. GSG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BCI achieves a 15.26% return, which is significantly lower than GSG's 25.54% return.
BCI
- 1D
- -1.23%
- 1M
- -9.78%
- YTD
- 15.26%
- 6M
- 13.54%
- 1Y
- 23.04%
- 3Y*
- 11.40%
- 5Y*
- 9.52%
- 10Y*
- —
GSG
- 1D
- -1.03%
- 1M
- -12.93%
- YTD
- 25.54%
- 6M
- 23.88%
- 1Y
- 27.65%
- 3Y*
- 14.02%
- 5Y*
- 12.78%
- 10Y*
- 6.58%
BCI vs. GSG - 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% | 3.81% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 25.54% | 5.93% | 8.52% | -5.51% | 24.08% | 38.77% | -23.94% | 15.62% | -13.88% | 10.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between BCI and GSG is 0.87, 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 | 0.87 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.84 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.85 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2017 | 0.82 |
The correlation between BCI and GSG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.82 to 0.87 - 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. GSG — Risk / Return Rank
BCI
GSG
BCI vs. GSG - 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 S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG). 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 | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.14 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.11 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.25 | 1.23 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.76 | 1.66 | +0.10 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 6.95 | 6.95 | 0.00 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BCI vs. GSG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BCI drawdown since its inception was -32.69%, smaller than the maximum GSG drawdown of -89.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCI and GSG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BCI | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.69% | -89.62% | +56.93% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -13.12% | -16.74% | +3.62% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.12% | -16.74% | +3.62% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.50% | -29.12% | +2.62% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -57.64% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -13.12% | -62.10% | +48.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.99% | -63.69% | +51.70% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 3.34% | 4.01% | -0.67% |
Volatility
BCI vs. GSG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) is 3.55%, while iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust (GSG) has a volatility of 5.46%. This indicates that BCI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GSG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BCI | GSG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.55% | 5.46% | -1.91% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 14.98% | 20.82% | -5.84% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.20% | 23.17% | -5.97% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.79% | 22.67% | -5.88% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.65% | 22.01% | -6.36% |
BCI vs. GSG - Expense Ratio Comparison
BCI has a 0.26% expense ratio, which is lower than GSG's 0.75% expense ratio.
Dividends
BCI vs. GSG - Dividend Comparison
BCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.30%, while GSG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| 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% |
GSG iShares S&P GSCI Commodity-Indexed Trust | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BCI and GSG have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GSG has higher volatility (5.46%) compared to BCI (3.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCI dropped -32.69% vs GSG's -89.62%.
On 5-year performance, GSG leads with 12.78% vs 9.52% for BCI. On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.26% 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, GSG has performed better with a 12.78% return vs 9.52%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BCI is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GSG.
BCI has the higher dividend yield at 14.30%, compared with 0.00% for GSG.
BCI tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while GSG tracks S&P GSCI Total Return Index. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.26% for BCI and 0.75% for GSG.
BCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.36 vs 1.22), 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 GSG
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