BITQ vs. CEFS

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BITQ (Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF) and CEFS (Saba Closed-End Funds ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BITQ is a Technology Equities fund tracking the Bitwise Crypto Innovators 30 Total Return, while CEFS is a Event Driven fund actively managed by Exchange Traded Concepts. BITQ is passively managed, while CEFS is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, BITQ returned 5.19%/yr vs 13.85%/yr for CEFS. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BITQ charges 0.85%/yr vs 1.29%/yr for CEFS.

Performance

BITQ vs. CEFS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF (BITQ) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BITQ achieves a 39.79% return, which is significantly higher than CEFS's 13.75% return.

BITQ

• 1D: -2.21%
• 1M: 11.04%
• YTD: 39.79%
• 6M: 21.39%
• 1Y: 60.30%
• 3Y*: 58.56%
• 5Y*: 5.19%
• 10Y*: —

CEFS

• 1D: -0.51%
• 1M: 4.35%
• YTD: 13.75%
• 6M: 15.64%
• 1Y: 25.00%
• 3Y*: 22.04%
• 5Y*: 13.85%
• 10Y*: —

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

BITQ vs. CEFS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BITQ Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF	39.79%	18.00%	46.97%	246.83%	-83.86%	-7.06%
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	13.75%	16.67%	23.48%	20.99%	-7.08%	8.25%

Correlation

The correlation between BITQ and CEFS is 0.49, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.49
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.43
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.45
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 13, 2021	0.44

BITQ vs. CEFS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BITQ	CEFS
Financial Services	67.1%	48.9%
Technology	28.1%	12.4%
Consumer Cyclical	4.8%	3.3%
Basic Materials	-	1.6%
Communication Services	-	4.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.8%
Energy	-	11.2%
Healthcare	-	4.6%
Industrials	-	6.7%
Real Estate	-	1.2%
Utilities	-	4.2%

Return for Risk

BITQ vs. CEFS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BITQ

BITQ Risk / Return Rank: 28
BITQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
BITQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
BITQ Omega Ratio Rank: 29
BITQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
BITQ Martin Ratio Rank: 22

CEFS

CEFS Risk / Return Rank: 80
CEFS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 76
CEFS Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
CEFS Omega Ratio Rank: 78
CEFS Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
CEFS Martin Ratio Rank: 83

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.

BITQ vs. CEFS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF (BITQ) and Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS). 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.

	BITQ	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.08	2.53	-1.45
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.68	3.71	-2.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.48	-0.28
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.35	4.43	-3.08
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.84	17.26	-14.42
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BITQ vs. CEFS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BITQ Sharpe Ratio is 1.08, which is lower than the CEFS Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BITQ and CEFS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BITQ	CEFS	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.08	2.53	-1.45
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.08	1.06	-0.99
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.07	0.79	-0.72

Drawdowns

BITQ vs. CEFS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BITQ drawdown since its inception was -90.32%, which is greater than CEFS's maximum drawdown of -38.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BITQ and CEFS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BITQ	CEFS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-90.32%	-38.99%	-51.33%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-44.99%	-5.67%	-39.32%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-51.22%	-13.37%	-37.85%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-90.32%	-16.85%	-73.47%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-14.06%	-0.51%	-13.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-52.80%	-3.67%	-49.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.32%	1.45%	+19.87%

Volatility

BITQ vs. CEFS - Volatility Comparison

Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF (BITQ) has a higher volatility of 14.73% compared to Saba Closed-End Funds ETF (CEFS) at 3.37%. This indicates that BITQ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CEFS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BITQ	CEFS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	14.73%	3.37%	+11.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	42.74%	8.56%	+34.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	56.05%	9.95%	+46.10%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	67.17%	13.08%	+54.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	67.23%	15.33%	+51.90%

BITQ vs. CEFS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BITQ has a 0.85% expense ratio, which is lower than CEFS's 1.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

BITQ vs. CEFS - Dividend Comparison

BITQ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CEFS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.10%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BITQ Bitwise Crypto Industry Innovators ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.90%	1.51%	0.00%	3.12%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CEFS Saba Closed-End Funds ETF	7.10%	7.84%	8.79%	9.20%	11.32%	10.73%	8.61%	8.10%	10.43%	5.02%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BITQ and CEFS in my portfolio?

BITQ and CEFS have a correlation of 0.49, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BITQ or CEFS?

BITQ has higher volatility (14.73%) compared to CEFS (3.37%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BITQ dropped -90.32% vs CEFS's -38.99%.

Which ETF is better, BITQ or CEFS?

On 5-year performance, CEFS leads with 13.85% vs 5.19% for BITQ. On fees, BITQ is cheaper at 0.85% per year. On volatility, CEFS has been the lower-risk option at 3.37%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BITQ or CEFS?

Over the 5-year period, CEFS has performed better with a 13.85% return vs 5.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BITQ or CEFS?

BITQ is cheaper with a 0.85% expense ratio, compared with 1.29% for CEFS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BITQ or CEFS?

CEFS has the higher dividend yield at 7.10%, compared with 0.00% for BITQ.

What is the main difference between BITQ and CEFS?

BITQ is categorized as Technology Equities, while CEFS is Event Driven. Their fees differ too: 0.85% for BITQ and 1.29% for CEFS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CEFS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 1.08), 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.