BFAP vs. IBLC
BFAP (FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April) and IBLC (iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds. BFAP is actively managed, while IBLC is passively managed. Over the past year, BFAP returned -25.68% vs 63.95% for IBLC. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BFAP charges 0.90%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IBLC.
Performance
BFAP vs. IBLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BFAP achieves a -22.18% return, which is significantly lower than IBLC's 27.22% return.
BFAP
- 1D
- -1.39%
- 1M
- -7.11%
- YTD
- -22.18%
- 6M
- -22.50%
- 1Y
- -25.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBLC
- 1D
- -2.19%
- 1M
- -0.02%
- YTD
- 27.22%
- 6M
- 19.07%
- 1Y
- 63.95%
- 3Y*
- 45.22%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BFAP vs. IBLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April | -22.18% | 8.90% |
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF | 27.22% | 77.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between BFAP and IBLC is 0.71, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.71 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025 | 0.69 |
The correlation between BFAP and IBLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.71 - 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. IBLC — Risk / Return Rank
BFAP
IBLC
BFAP vs. IBLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) and iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC). 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 | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.35 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -3.39 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.80 | 1.21 | -0.41 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.77 | 1.43 | -2.20 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.40 | 2.80 | -4.20 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BFAP vs. IBLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BFAP drawdown since its inception was -33.31%, smaller than the maximum IBLC drawdown of -62.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BFAP and IBLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BFAP | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -33.31% | -62.54% | +29.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -33.31% | -44.94% | +11.63% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -51.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -32.37% | -16.36% | -16.01% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -11.64% | -25.76% | +14.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 18.39% | 22.89% | -4.50% |
Volatility
BFAP vs. IBLC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) is 5.22%, while iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) has a volatility of 16.66%. This indicates that BFAP experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BFAP | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 5.22% | 16.66% | -11.44% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 16.92% | 41.64% | -24.72% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 21.43% | 55.87% | -34.44% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 20.47% | 64.51% | -44.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 20.47% | 64.51% | -44.04% |
BFAP vs. IBLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
BFAP has a 0.90% expense ratio, which is higher than IBLC's 0.47% expense ratio.
Dividends
BFAP vs. IBLC - Dividend Comparison
BFAP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 24.38%, more than IBLC's 4.92% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BFAP FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April | 24.38% | 18.97% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF | 4.92% | 6.31% | 1.60% | 1.79% | 0.84% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BFAP and IBLC have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBLC has higher volatility (16.66%) compared to BFAP (5.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BFAP dropped -33.31% vs IBLC's -62.54%.
On 1-year performance, IBLC leads with 63.95% vs -25.68% for BFAP. On fees, IBLC is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, BFAP has been the lower-risk option at 5.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IBLC has performed better with a 63.95% return vs -25.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IBLC is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BFAP.
BFAP has the higher dividend yield at 24.38%, compared with 4.92% for IBLC.
They also come from different issuers: First Trust and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.90% for BFAP and 0.47% for IBLC.
IBLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.15 vs -1.20), 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 IBLC
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