BDCZ vs. XLF
BDCZ (ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN) and XLF (State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF) are both Financials Equities funds - BDCZ tracks the BDCZ-US - MVIS US Business Development Companies Index while XLF tracks the Financial Select Sector Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, BDCZ returned 6.23%/yr vs 12.38%/yr for XLF. At a 0.48 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BDCZ charges 0.85%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for XLF.
Performance
BDCZ vs. XLF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BDCZ achieves a -7.98% return, which is significantly lower than XLF's -6.64% return. Over the past 10 years, BDCZ has underperformed XLF with an annualized return of 6.23%, while XLF has yielded a comparatively higher 12.38% annualized return.
BDCZ
- 1D
- -2.73%
- 1M
- -7.44%
- YTD
- -7.98%
- 6M
- -8.99%
- 1Y
- -10.32%
- 3Y*
- 4.75%
- 5Y*
- 3.38%
- 10Y*
- 6.23%
XLF
- 1D
- -1.15%
- 1M
- -1.38%
- YTD
- -6.64%
- 6M
- -4.18%
- 1Y
- 1.13%
- 3Y*
- 17.64%
- 5Y*
- 7.61%
- 10Y*
- 12.38%
BDCZ vs. XLF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BDCZ ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN | -7.98% | -3.72% | 12.22% | 25.31% | -9.12% | 33.97% | -10.95% | 26.00% | -7.64% | 0.40% |
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF | -6.64% | 14.90% | 30.56% | 12.03% | -10.59% | 34.80% | -1.74% | 31.88% | -13.06% | 22.00% |
Correlation
The correlation between BDCZ and XLF is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.52 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.60 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 12, 2015 | 0.48 |
The correlation between BDCZ and XLF shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.60 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
BDCZ vs. XLF — Risk / Return Rank
BDCZ
XLF
BDCZ vs. XLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN (BDCZ) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF). 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.
| BDCZ | XLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.59 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.79 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.93 | 1.02 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.52 | 0.08 | -0.60 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.95 | 0.20 | -1.14 |
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
| BDCZ | XLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.51 | 0.08 | -0.59 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.19 | 0.41 | -0.22 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.29 | 0.56 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.27 | 0.20 | +0.07 |
Drawdowns
BDCZ vs. XLF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BDCZ drawdown since its inception was -55.63%, smaller than the maximum XLF drawdown of -82.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDCZ and XLF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BDCZ | XLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -55.63% | -82.69% | +27.06% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -19.95% | -14.79% | -5.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -20.77% | -15.54% | -5.23% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -23.12% | -25.81% | +2.69% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -55.63% | -42.86% | -12.77% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -17.27% | -9.34% | -7.93% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.86% | -20.03% | +12.17% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 10.94% | 5.66% | +5.28% |
Volatility
BDCZ vs. XLF - Volatility Comparison
ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN (BDCZ) has a higher volatility of 8.37% compared to State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) at 3.29%. This indicates that BDCZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BDCZ | XLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.37% | 3.29% | +5.08% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.17% | 10.94% | +6.23% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 20.42% | 14.41% | +6.01% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.80% | 18.63% | -0.83% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.73% | 22.16% | -0.43% |
BDCZ vs. XLF - Expense Ratio Comparison
BDCZ has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is higher than XLF's 0.08% expense ratio.
Dividends
BDCZ vs. XLF - Dividend Comparison
BDCZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.28%, more than XLF's 1.56% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BDCZ ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN | 11.28% | 10.65% | 9.26% | 9.13% | 9.39% | 7.49% | 10.01% | 8.40% | 9.66% | 8.74% | 7.98% | 0.00% |
XLF State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF | 1.56% | 1.31% | 1.42% | 1.71% | 2.04% | 1.63% | 2.03% | 1.87% | 2.08% | 1.48% | 21.10% | 1.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BDCZ and XLF have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BDCZ has higher volatility (8.37%) compared to XLF (3.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BDCZ dropped -55.63% vs XLF's -82.69%.
On 10-year performance, XLF leads with 12.38% vs 6.23% for BDCZ. On fees, XLF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 3.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, XLF has performed better with a 12.38% return vs 6.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XLF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for BDCZ.
BDCZ has the higher dividend yield at 11.28%, compared with 1.56% for XLF.
BDCZ tracks BDCZ-US - MVIS US Business Development Companies Index, while XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index. They also come from different issuers: UBS and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for BDCZ and 0.08% for XLF.
XLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.08 vs -0.51), 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 BDCZ and XLF
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