BCI vs. PIT

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) and PIT (VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF) are both Commodities funds. BCI is passively managed, while PIT is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, BCI returned 11.40%/yr vs 18.98%/yr for PIT. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BCI charges 0.26%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PIT.

Performance

BCI vs. PIT - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) and VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BCI achieves a 15.26% return, which is significantly lower than PIT's 25.62% return.

BCI

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: -9.78%
• YTD: 15.26%
• 6M: 13.54%
• 1Y: 23.04%
• 3Y*: 11.40%
• 5Y*: 9.52%
• 10Y*: —

PIT

• 1D: -1.32%
• 1M: -11.78%
• YTD: 25.62%
• 6M: 23.58%
• 1Y: 39.64%
• 3Y*: 18.98%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BCI vs. PIT - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	15.26%	15.07%	5.47%	-8.79%	-0.14%
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF	25.62%	21.63%	6.77%	-4.54%	1.67%

Correlation

The correlation between BCI and PIT is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 22, 2022	0.89

The correlation between BCI and PIT has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.88 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BCI vs. PIT — Risk / Return Rank

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

BCI

BCI Risk / Return Rank: 39
BCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
BCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 37
BCI Omega Ratio Rank: 39
BCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 36
BCI Martin Ratio Rank: 44

PIT

PIT Risk / Return Rank: 57
PIT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
PIT Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
PIT Omega Ratio Rank: 56
PIT Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
PIT Martin Ratio Rank: 63

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.

BCI vs. PIT - 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 VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT). 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	PIT	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	1.85	-0.49
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.84	2.40	-0.55
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.25	1.33	-0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.76	2.62	-0.86
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.95	10.88	-3.93

BCI vs. PIT - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BCI Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is comparable to the PIT Sharpe Ratio of 1.85. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BCI and PIT, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BCI vs. PIT - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BCI drawdown since its inception was -32.69%, which is greater than PIT's maximum drawdown of -15.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BCI and PIT.

Drawdown Indicators

	BCI	PIT	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.69%	-15.19%	-17.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.12%	-15.19%	+2.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.12%	-15.19%	+2.07%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.50%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-13.12%	-15.19%	+2.07%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-11.99%	-4.08%	-7.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.34%	3.66%	-0.32%

Volatility

BCI vs. PIT - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) is 3.55%, while VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF (PIT) has a volatility of 4.72%. This indicates that BCI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PIT based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BCI	PIT	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.55%	4.72%	-1.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.98%	19.40%	-4.42%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.20%	21.66%	-4.46%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.79%	17.50%	-0.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.65%	17.50%	-1.85%

BCI vs. PIT - Expense Ratio Comparison

BCI has a 0.26% expense ratio, which is lower than PIT's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

BCI vs. PIT - Dividend Comparison

BCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.30%, more than PIT's 7.10% 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%
PIT VanEck Commodity Strategy ETF	7.10%	8.92%	3.59%	6.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BCI and PIT in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, BCI and PIT 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.

Which is riskier, BCI or PIT?

PIT has higher volatility (4.72%) compared to BCI (3.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BCI dropped -32.69% vs PIT's -15.19%.

Which ETF is better, BCI or PIT?

On 3-year performance, PIT leads with 18.98% vs 11.40% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, BCI or PIT?

Over the 3-year period, PIT has performed better with a 18.98% return vs 11.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BCI or PIT?

BCI is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PIT.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BCI or PIT?

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 14.30%, compared with 7.10% for PIT.

What is the main difference between BCI and PIT?

They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.26% for BCI and 0.55% for PIT.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

PIT currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.85 vs 1.36), 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.