BCI vs. LMUB
BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) and LMUB (iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BCI is a Commodities fund tracking the Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while LMUB is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the ICE AMT-Free US Long National Municipal Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, BCI returned 35.51% vs 7.00% for LMUB. Their -0.22 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. BCI charges 0.26%/yr vs 0.09%/yr for LMUB.
Performance
BCI vs. LMUB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BCI achieves a 22.53% return, which is significantly higher than LMUB's 0.34% return.
BCI
- 1D
- -0.21%
- 1M
- 7.31%
- 6M
- 10.17%
- YTD
- 22.53%
- 1Y
- 35.51%
- 3Y*
- 11.89%
- 5Y*
- 10.01%
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 7.06%
LMUB
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- -2.97%
- 6M
- -0.36%
- YTD
- 0.34%
- 1Y
- 7.00%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 2.82%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $33.67M | $55.32M | $39.13M | |
| $22.34M | $14.18M | $10.44M |
BCI vs. LMUB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 22.53% | 7.15% |
LMUB iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF | 0.34% | 3.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between BCI and LMUB is -0.26, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | -0.26 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 18, 2025 | -0.22 |
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. LMUB — Risk / Return Rank
BCI
LMUB
BCI vs. LMUB - 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 Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF (LMUB). 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 | LMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.20 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.02 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.35 | 1.36 | -0.01 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.37 | 2.41 | -0.04 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.60 | 7.89 | -0.29 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BCI vs. LMUB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BCI drawdown since its inception was -32.69%, which is greater than LMUB's maximum drawdown of -5.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCI and LMUB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BCI | LMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -32.69% | -5.51% | -27.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -14.82% | -3.13% | -11.69% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -14.82% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -26.50% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -7.64% | -2.97% | -4.67% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.96% | -1.52% | -10.44% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.61% | 0.95% | +3.66% |
Volatility
BCI vs. LMUB - Volatility Comparison
abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a higher volatility of 5.02% compared to iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF (LMUB) at 1.20%. This indicates that BCI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LMUB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BCI | LMUB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.02% | 1.20% | +3.82% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 15.08% | 3.14% | +11.94% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 17.55% | 4.17% | +13.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.85% | 5.75% | +11.10% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.68% | 5.75% | +9.93% |
BCI vs. LMUB - Expense Ratio Comparison
BCI has a 0.26% expense ratio, which is higher than LMUB's 0.09% 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. LMUB - Dividend Comparison
BCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 13.46%, more than LMUB's 3.85% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 13.46% | 16.49% | 3.29% | 3.93% | 19.98% | 19.43% | 0.68% | 1.47% | 1.13% | 5.02% |
LMUB iShares Long-Term National Muni Bond ETF | 3.51% | 3.14% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BCI and LMUB have a correlation of -0.26, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BCI has higher volatility (5.02%) compared to LMUB (1.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCI dropped -32.69% vs LMUB's -5.51%.
On 1-year performance, BCI leads with 35.51% vs 7.00% for LMUB. On fees, LMUB is cheaper at 0.09% per year. On volatility, LMUB has been the lower-risk option at 1.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BCI has performed better with a 35.51% return vs 7.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
LMUB is cheaper with a 0.09% expense ratio, compared with 0.26% for BCI.
BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.46%, compared with 3.51% for LMUB.
BCI is categorized as Commodities, while LMUB is Municipal Bonds. BCI tracks Bloomberg Commodity Index Total Return, while LMUB tracks ICE AMT-Free US Long National Municipal Index. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.26% for BCI and 0.09% for LMUB.
BCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.00 vs 1.80), 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 LMUB
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