BKCH vs. CBTJ

Last updated Jul 15, 2026

BKCH (Global X Blockchain ETF) and CBTJ (Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January) are both Blockchain funds. BKCH is passively managed, while CBTJ is actively managed. Over the past year, BKCH returned 15.25% vs -37.79% for CBTJ. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BKCH charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.69%/yr for CBTJ.

Performance

BKCH vs. CBTJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Blockchain ETF (BKCH) and Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BKCH achieves a 5.51% return, which is significantly higher than CBTJ's -18.22% return.

BKCH

• 1D: 0.99%
• 1M: -19.29%
• 6M: -15.90%
• YTD: 5.51%
• 1Y: 15.25%
• 3Y*: 22.62%
• 5Y*: -2.20%
• 10Y*: —

CBTJ

• 1D: 1.50%
• 1M: -0.33%
• 6M: -23.82%
• YTD: -18.22%
• 1Y: -37.79%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BKCH vs. CBTJ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BKCH Global X Blockchain ETF	5.51%	19.79%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	-18.22%	-11.32%

Correlation

The correlation between BKCH and CBTJ is 0.64, 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	0.64
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 4, 2025	0.65

The correlation between BKCH and CBTJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.64 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BKCH vs. CBTJ — Risk / Return Rank

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

BKCH

BKCH Risk / Return Rank: 15
BKCH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 13
BKCH Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
BKCH Omega Ratio Rank: 17
BKCH Calmar Ratio Rank: 13
BKCH Martin Ratio Rank: 12

CBTJ

CBTJ Risk / Return Rank: 1
CBTJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
CBTJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
CBTJ Omega Ratio Rank: 1
CBTJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
CBTJ Martin Ratio Rank: 2

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.

BKCH vs. CBTJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Blockchain ETF (BKCH) and Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ). 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.

	BKCH	CBTJ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.22	-1.42	+1.64
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.81	-2.13	+2.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	0.77	+0.33
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.27	-0.89	+1.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	0.47	-1.40	+1.87

BKCH vs. CBTJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BKCH Sharpe Ratio is 0.22, which is higher than the CBTJ Sharpe Ratio of -1.42. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BKCH and CBTJ, 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

BKCH vs. CBTJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BKCH drawdown since its inception was -91.80%, which is greater than CBTJ's maximum drawdown of -42.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BKCH and CBTJ.

Drawdown Indicators

	BKCH	CBTJ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-91.80%	-42.41%	-49.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-56.28%	-42.41%	-13.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-57.99%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-91.80%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-49.42%	-40.31%	-9.11%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-61.67%	-17.01%	-44.66%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	32.29%	27.12%	+5.17%

Volatility

BKCH vs. CBTJ - Volatility Comparison

Global X Blockchain ETF (BKCH) has a higher volatility of 15.59% compared to Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CBTJ) at 4.64%. This indicates that BKCH's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CBTJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BKCH	CBTJ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.59%	4.64%	+10.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	50.67%	17.32%	+33.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	70.34%	26.76%	+43.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	75.26%	25.04%	+50.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	75.27%	25.04%	+50.23%

BKCH vs. CBTJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

BKCH has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than CBTJ's 0.69% expense ratio.

Dividends

BKCH vs. CBTJ - Dividend Comparison

BKCH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, more than CBTJ's 1.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BKCH Global X Blockchain ETF	1.81%	2.00%	7.61%	2.33%	1.29%	4.28%
CBTJ Calamos Bitcoin 80 Series Structured Alt Protection ETF - January	1.77%	1.45%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BKCH and CBTJ in my portfolio?

BKCH and CBTJ have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BKCH or CBTJ?

BKCH has higher volatility (15.59%) compared to CBTJ (4.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BKCH dropped -91.80% vs CBTJ's -42.41%.

Which ETF is better, BKCH or CBTJ?

On 1-year performance, BKCH leads with 15.25% vs -37.79% for CBTJ. On fees, BKCH is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, CBTJ has been the lower-risk option at 4.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BKCH or CBTJ?

Over the 1-year period, BKCH has performed better with a 15.25% return vs -37.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BKCH or CBTJ?

BKCH is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.69% for CBTJ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BKCH or CBTJ?

BKCH has the higher dividend yield at 1.81%, compared with 1.77% for CBTJ.

What is the main difference between BKCH and CBTJ?

They also come from different issuers: Global X and Calamos. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BKCH and 0.69% for CBTJ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BKCH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.22 vs -1.42), 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.