BITS vs. IBLC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BITS (Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF) and IBLC (iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds - BITS tracks the NONE while IBLC tracks the ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, BITS returned 49.59%/yr vs 48.31%/yr for IBLC. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BITS charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IBLC.

Performance

BITS vs. IBLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS) and iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BITS achieves a 4.17% return, which is significantly lower than IBLC's 32.34% return.

BITS

• 1D: -2.94%
• 1M: -1.76%
• YTD: 4.17%
• 6M: -6.53%
• 1Y: 19.33%
• 3Y*: 49.59%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBLC

• 1D: -3.00%
• 1M: 13.52%
• YTD: 32.34%
• 6M: 15.25%
• 1Y: 73.27%
• 3Y*: 48.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BITS vs. IBLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
BITS Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF	4.17%	14.90%	61.84%	212.23%	-64.14%
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF	32.34%	27.05%	18.58%	201.47%	-57.76%

Correlation

The correlation between BITS and IBLC is 0.95 - 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	0.95
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2022	0.92

The correlation between BITS and IBLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

BITS vs. IBLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BITS	IBLC
Financial Services	72.9%	66.6%
Technology	27.1%	30.7%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	2.5%
Consumer Cyclical	-	0.1%
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	0.2%

Return for Risk

BITS vs. IBLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

BITS

BITS Risk / Return Rank: 15
BITS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 14
BITS Sortino Ratio Rank: 17
BITS Omega Ratio Rank: 16
BITS Calmar Ratio Rank: 14
BITS Martin Ratio Rank: 12

IBLC

IBLC Risk / Return Rank: 33
IBLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
IBLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
IBLC Omega Ratio Rank: 33
IBLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
IBLC Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

BITS vs. IBLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS) 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.

	BITS	IBLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.37	1.34	-0.97
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.86	1.92	-1.06
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.23	-0.13
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.40	1.64	-1.24
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.75	3.26	-2.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BITS vs. IBLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BITS Sharpe Ratio is 0.37, which is lower than the IBLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BITS and IBLC, 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

	BITS	IBLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.37	1.34	-0.97
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.02	0.40	-0.38

Drawdowns

BITS vs. IBLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BITS drawdown since its inception was -83.11%, which is greater than IBLC's maximum drawdown of -62.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BITS and IBLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	BITS	IBLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-83.11%	-62.54%	-20.57%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-48.38%	-44.94%	-3.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-48.38%	-51.68%	+3.30%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-31.42%	-12.99%	-18.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-42.76%	-25.89%	-16.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	25.68%	22.56%	+3.12%

Volatility

BITS vs. IBLC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS) is 12.83%, while iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) has a volatility of 14.67%. This indicates that BITS 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.

Volatility by Period

	BITS	IBLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.83%	14.67%	-1.84%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	40.38%	40.76%	-0.38%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	52.55%	54.94%	-2.39%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	60.91%	64.49%	-3.58%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	60.91%	64.49%	-3.58%

BITS vs. IBLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

BITS has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than IBLC's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

BITS vs. IBLC - Dividend Comparison

BITS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 21.88%, more than IBLC's 4.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BITS Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF	21.88%	22.80%	29.49%	13.69%	0.48%	1.90%
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF	4.77%	6.31%	1.60%	1.79%	0.84%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BITS and IBLC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, BITS and IBLC 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.

Which is riskier, BITS or IBLC?

IBLC has higher volatility (14.67%) compared to BITS (12.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BITS dropped -83.11% vs IBLC's -62.54%.

Which ETF is better, BITS or IBLC?

On 3-year performance, BITS leads with 49.59% vs 48.31% for IBLC. On fees, IBLC is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, BITS has been the lower-risk option at 12.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BITS or IBLC?

Over the 3-year period, BITS has performed better with a 49.59% return vs 48.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BITS or IBLC?

IBLC is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BITS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BITS or IBLC?

BITS has the higher dividend yield at 21.88%, compared with 4.77% for IBLC.

What is the main difference between BITS and IBLC?

BITS tracks NONE, while IBLC tracks ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index. They also come from different issuers: Global X and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BITS and 0.47% for IBLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 vs 0.37), 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.