BFAP vs. CIBR
BFAP (FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April) and CIBR (First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BFAP is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by First Trust, while CIBR is a Cybersecurity fund tracking the Nasdaq CTA Cybersecurity Index. BFAP is actively managed, while CIBR is passively managed. Over the past year, BFAP returned -29.14% vs 35.14% for CIBR. Their 0.32 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. BFAP charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for CIBR.
Performance
BFAP vs. CIBR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFAP achieves a -21.35% return, which is significantly lower than CIBR's 37.43% return.
BFAP
- 1D
- 0.25%
- 1M
- 1.78%
- 6M
- -13.09%
- YTD
- -21.35%
- 1Y
- -29.14%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- -10.97%
CIBR
- 1D
- 4.29%
- 1M
- 8.02%
- 6M
- 46.36%
- YTD
- 37.43%
- 1Y
- 35.14%
- 3Y*
- 30.10%
- 5Y*
- 15.15%
- 10Y*
- 18.86%
- ALL TIME*
- 16.06%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $15.29K | $11.99K | $25.71K | |
| $122.77M | $138.03M | $141.88M |
BFAP vs. CIBR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April | -21.35% | 8.90% |
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | 37.43% | 17.08% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFAP and CIBR is 0.33, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.33 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025 | 0.32 |
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
BFAP vs. CIBR — Risk / Return Rank
BFAP
CIBR
BFAP vs. CIBR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) and First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR). 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.
| BFAP | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.70 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.86 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.77 | 1.24 | -0.47 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.86 | 1.61 | -2.46 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.37 | 3.71 | -5.08 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BFAP vs. CIBR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFAP drawdown since its inception was -34.15%, roughly equal to the maximum CIBR drawdown of -33.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFAP and CIBR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFAP | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.15% | -33.89% | -0.26% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -34.15% | -21.99% | -12.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -21.99% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -33.89% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -33.89% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -31.65% | 0.00% | -31.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.41% | -8.62% | -4.79% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 21.36% | 9.49% | +11.87% |
Volatility
BFAP vs. CIBR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) is 3.75%, while First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF (CIBR) has a volatility of 8.33%. This indicates that BFAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CIBR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BFAP | CIBR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.75% | 8.33% | -4.58% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.78% | 22.75% | -8.97% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.57% | 26.31% | -4.74% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 19.98% | 25.38% | -5.40% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 19.98% | 23.69% | -3.71% |
BFAP vs. CIBR - Expense Ratio Comparison
BFAP has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than CIBR's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
BFAP vs. CIBR - Dividend Comparison
BFAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 24.12%, more than CIBR's 0.40% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April | 24.12% | 18.97% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
CIBR First Trust NASDAQ Cybersecurity ETF | 0.40% | 0.42% | 0.29% | 0.42% | 0.31% | 0.59% | 1.10% | 0.23% | 0.23% | 0.10% | 0.77% | 0.58% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BFAP and CIBR have a correlation of 0.33, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
CIBR has higher volatility (8.33%) compared to BFAP (3.75%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFAP dropped -34.15% vs CIBR's -33.89%.
On 1-year performance, CIBR leads with 35.14% vs -29.14% for BFAP. On fees, CIBR is cheaper at 0.60% per year. On volatility, BFAP has been the lower-risk option at 3.75%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, CIBR has performed better with a 35.14% return vs -29.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CIBR is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BFAP.
BFAP has the higher dividend yield at 24.12%, compared with 0.40% for CIBR.
BFAP is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while CIBR is Cybersecurity. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for BFAP and 0.60% for CIBR.
CIBR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 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.
Find the right allocation for BFAP and CIBR
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