BIB vs. BLOK

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BIB (ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Biotechnology) and BLOK (Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BIB is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the NASDAQ Biotechnology Index (200%), while BLOK is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Amplify. BIB is passively managed, while BLOK is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BIB returned -0.74%/yr vs 11.69%/yr for BLOK. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BIB charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.70%/yr for BLOK.

Performance

BIB vs. BLOK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Biotechnology (BIB) and Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF (BLOK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BIB achieves a 12.50% return, which is significantly lower than BLOK's 14.77% return.

BIB

• 1D: 1.97%
• 1M: 9.49%
• YTD: 12.50%
• 6M: 8.62%
• 1Y: 100.86%
• 3Y*: 19.65%
• 5Y*: -0.74%
• 10Y*: 9.71%

BLOK

• 1D: -1.82%
• 1M: 2.14%
• YTD: 14.77%
• 6M: 9.76%
• 1Y: 27.49%
• 3Y*: 48.25%
• 5Y*: 11.69%
• 10Y*: —

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

BIB vs. BLOK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BIB ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Biotechnology	12.50%	59.21%	-9.84%	-1.06%	-28.85%	-6.02%	39.79%	46.71%	-29.87%
BLOK Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF	14.77%	32.64%	53.12%	99.62%	-62.36%	30.76%	90.17%	29.54%	-25.38%

Correlation

The correlation between BIB and BLOK is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.42
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.46
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.52
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 17, 2018	0.54

The correlation between BIB and BLOK shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (1 year) to 0.54 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BIB vs. BLOK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BIB	BLOK
Healthcare	62.9%	-
Financial Services	6.8%	60.4%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	3.1%
Consumer Cyclical	-	6.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Industrials	-	1.0%
Real Estate	-	0.0%
Technology	-	28.3%
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BIB vs. BLOK — Risk / Return Rank

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

BIB

BIB Risk / Return Rank: 80
BIB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
BIB Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
BIB Omega Ratio Rank: 65
BIB Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
BIB Martin Ratio Rank: 88

BLOK

BLOK Risk / Return Rank: 20
BLOK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
BLOK Sortino Ratio Rank: 22
BLOK Omega Ratio Rank: 21
BLOK Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
BLOK Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

BIB vs. BLOK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Biotechnology (BIB) and Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF (BLOK). 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.

	BIB	BLOK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.51	0.71	+1.80
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.08	1.17	+1.91
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.14	+0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.99	0.77	+5.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	18.30	1.67	+16.63

BIB vs. BLOK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BIB Sharpe Ratio is 2.51, which is higher than the BLOK Sharpe Ratio of 0.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BIB and BLOK, 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

BIB vs. BLOK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BIB drawdown since its inception was -67.24%, smaller than the maximum BLOK drawdown of -73.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BIB and BLOK.

Drawdown Indicators

	BIB	BLOK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-67.24%	-73.33%	+6.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.92%	-35.64%	+18.72%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-45.30%	-35.64%	-9.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-65.86%	-73.33%	+7.47%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-66.20%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-17.29%	-11.27%	-6.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-32.71%	-25.99%	-6.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.53%	16.48%	-10.95%

Volatility

BIB vs. BLOK - Volatility Comparison

ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Biotechnology (BIB) has a higher volatility of 13.56% compared to Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF (BLOK) at 12.42%. This indicates that BIB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BLOK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BIB	BLOK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	13.56%	12.42%	+1.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	31.65%	29.64%	+2.01%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	40.43%	39.10%	+1.33%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.60%	42.53%	+1.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	46.39%	39.03%	+7.36%

BIB vs. BLOK - Expense Ratio Comparison

BIB has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BLOK's 0.70% expense ratio.

Dividends

BIB vs. BLOK - Dividend Comparison

BIB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.55%, less than BLOK's 0.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BIB ProShares Ultra Nasdaq Biotechnology	0.55%	0.77%	1.69%	0.07%	0.03%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BLOK Amplify Blockchain Technology ETF	0.62%	0.72%	6.00%	1.15%	0.00%	14.31%	1.88%	2.05%	1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BIB and BLOK in my portfolio?

BIB and BLOK have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BIB or BLOK?

BIB has higher volatility (13.56%) compared to BLOK (12.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BIB dropped -67.24% vs BLOK's -73.33%.

Which ETF is better, BIB or BLOK?

On 5-year performance, BLOK leads with 11.69% vs -0.74% for BIB. On fees, BLOK is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, BLOK has been the lower-risk option at 12.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BIB or BLOK?

Over the 5-year period, BLOK has performed better with a 11.69% return vs -0.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BIB or BLOK?

BLOK is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BIB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BIB or BLOK?

BLOK has the higher dividend yield at 0.62%, compared with 0.55% for BIB.

What is the main difference between BIB and BLOK?

BIB is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BLOK is Blockchain. They also come from different issuers: ProShares and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BIB and 0.70% for BLOK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BIB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.51 vs 0.71), 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.