BFAP vs. EZBC
BFAP (FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April) and EZBC (Franklin Bitcoin ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds. BFAP is actively managed, while EZBC is passively managed. Over the past year, BFAP returned -24.44% vs -38.68% for EZBC. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. BFAP charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for EZBC.
Performance
BFAP vs. EZBC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFAP achieves a -20.89% return, which is significantly higher than EZBC's -25.36% return.
BFAP
- 1D
- -1.05%
- 1M
- -7.01%
- YTD
- -20.89%
- 6M
- -23.66%
- 1Y
- -24.44%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EZBC
- 1D
- -2.73%
- 1M
- -18.42%
- YTD
- -25.36%
- 6M
- -29.82%
- 1Y
- -38.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BFAP vs. EZBC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April | -20.89% | 8.90% |
EZBC Franklin Bitcoin ETF | -25.36% | 4.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFAP and EZBC is 0.97 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.97 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 7, 2025 | 0.96 |
The correlation between BFAP and EZBC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - 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
BFAP vs. EZBC — Risk / Return Rank
BFAP
EZBC
BFAP vs. EZBC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) and Franklin Bitcoin ETF (EZBC). 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.
| BFAP | EZBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.27 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.35 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.81 | 0.86 | -0.05 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.79 | -0.79 | 0.00 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.45 | -1.36 | -0.09 |
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
| BFAP | EZBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.15 | -0.89 | -0.27 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.59 | 0.30 | -0.89 |
Drawdowns
BFAP vs. EZBC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFAP drawdown since its inception was -31.25%, smaller than the maximum EZBC drawdown of -49.37%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFAP and EZBC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFAP | EZBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -31.25% | -49.37% | +18.12% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -31.25% | -49.37% | +18.12% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -31.25% | -48.04% | +16.79% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.77% | -16.01% | +5.24% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 16.89% | 28.42% | -11.53% |
Volatility
BFAP vs. EZBC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) is 3.59%, while Franklin Bitcoin ETF (EZBC) has a volatility of 9.43%. This indicates that BFAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EZBC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BFAP | EZBC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.59% | 9.43% | -5.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 17.66% | 34.44% | -16.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.26% | 43.67% | -22.41% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.57% | 50.06% | -29.49% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.57% | 50.06% | -29.49% |
BFAP vs. EZBC - Expense Ratio Comparison
BFAP has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than EZBC's 0.19% expense ratio.
Dividends
BFAP vs. EZBC - Dividend Comparison
BFAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 23.98%, while EZBC has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 |
|---|---|---|
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April | 23.98% | 18.97% |
EZBC Franklin Bitcoin ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.97, BFAP and EZBC 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.
EZBC has higher volatility (9.43%) compared to BFAP (3.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFAP dropped -31.25% vs EZBC's -49.37%.
On 1-year performance, BFAP leads with -24.44% vs -38.68% for EZBC. On fees, EZBC is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, BFAP has been the lower-risk option at 3.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BFAP has performed better with a -24.44% return vs -38.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EZBC is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BFAP.
BFAP has the higher dividend yield at 23.98%, compared with 0.00% for EZBC.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for BFAP and 0.19% for EZBC.
EZBC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.89 vs -1.15), 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 EZBC
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