PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BLCN vs. LEAD
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BLCN vs. LEAD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN) and Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLCN achieves a 13.09% return, which is significantly lower than LEAD's 15.75% return.


BLCN

1D
0.39%
1M
10.42%
YTD
13.09%
6M
10.14%
1Y
27.10%
3Y*
9.50%
5Y*
-9.77%
10Y*

LEAD

1D
0.48%
1M
4.84%
YTD
15.75%
6M
14.25%
1Y
25.56%
3Y*
19.23%
5Y*
12.16%
10Y*
14.71%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BLCN vs. LEAD - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021202020192018
BLCN
Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF
13.09%-3.69%5.62%21.09%-51.76%4.86%60.60%33.94%-19.15%
LEAD
Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF
15.75%15.52%10.32%26.25%-18.16%29.69%23.41%33.75%-11.06%

Correlation

The correlation between BLCN and LEAD is 0.39, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.39

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.45

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.57

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 18, 2018

0.63

Over the past year, the correlation between BLCN and LEAD has dropped to 0.39 - well below their long-term average of 0.63, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

BLCN vs. LEAD - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BLCN
LEAD

Technology

57.1%
36.5%

Industrials

16.0%
31.1%

Financial Services

7.3%
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

4.4%
1.3%

Basic Materials

4.4%

-

Utilities

4.2%

-

Communication Services

3.5%
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

-

3.8%

Energy

-

1.3%

Healthcare

-

5.7%

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

BLCN
57.1%
LEAD
36.5%

Industrials

BLCN
16.0%
LEAD
31.1%

Financial Services

BLCN
7.3%
LEAD
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

BLCN
4.4%
LEAD
1.3%

Basic Materials

BLCN
4.4%
LEAD

-

Utilities

BLCN
4.2%
LEAD

-

Communication Services

BLCN
3.5%
LEAD
0.1%

Consumer Defensive

BLCN

-

LEAD
3.8%

Energy

BLCN

-

LEAD
1.3%

Healthcare

BLCN

-

LEAD
5.7%

Real Estate

BLCN

-

LEAD

-

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

BLCN vs. LEAD — Risk / Return Rank

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

BLCN
BLCN Risk / Return Rank: 2121
Overall Rank
BLCN Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2121
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BLCN Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
BLCN Omega Ratio Rank: 2323
Omega Ratio Rank
BLCN Calmar Ratio Rank: 2121
Calmar Ratio Rank
BLCN Martin Ratio Rank: 1818
Martin Ratio Rank

LEAD
LEAD Risk / Return Rank: 5656
Overall Rank
LEAD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LEAD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
LEAD Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
LEAD Calmar Ratio Rank: 6060
Calmar Ratio Rank
LEAD Martin Ratio Rank: 6969
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BLCN vs. LEAD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN) and Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD). 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.


BLCNLEADDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.01

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.21

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.15

1.31

-0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.92

2.97

-2.05

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.97

12.66

-10.70

BLCN vs. LEAD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLCN Sharpe Ratio is 0.76, which is lower than the LEAD Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLCN and LEAD, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BLCNLEADDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.76

1.77

-1.01

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.28

0.71

-0.99

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.79

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.08

0.80

-0.72

Drawdowns

BLCN vs. LEAD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLCN drawdown since its inception was -67.51%, which is greater than LEAD's maximum drawdown of -32.19%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLCN and LEAD.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BLCNLEADDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-67.51%

-32.19%

-35.32%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-29.53%

-8.65%

-20.88%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-45.26%

-17.86%

-27.40%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-67.51%

-24.93%

-42.58%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.19%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-45.11%

0.00%

-45.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-30.29%

-4.42%

-25.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

13.82%

2.02%

+11.80%

Volatility

BLCN vs. LEAD - Volatility Comparison

Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF (BLCN) has a higher volatility of 14.45% compared to Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF (LEAD) at 4.12%. This indicates that BLCN's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than LEAD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BLCNLEADDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

14.45%

4.12%

+10.33%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

29.11%

11.33%

+17.78%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

36.03%

14.56%

+21.47%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

34.93%

17.34%

+17.59%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

31.22%

18.65%

+12.57%

BLCN vs. LEAD - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLCN has a 0.68% expense ratio, which is higher than LEAD's 0.43% expense ratio.


Dividends

BLCN vs. LEAD - Dividend Comparison

BLCN's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.66%, more than LEAD's 0.58% yield.


PositionTTM2025202420232022202120202019201820172016
BLCN
Siren ETF Trust Siren Nasdaq NexGen Economy ETF
2.66%3.01%0.67%0.54%1.28%0.56%0.58%1.45%1.16%0.00%0.00%
LEAD
Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend ETF
0.58%0.70%0.93%1.13%1.27%1.79%0.81%1.32%1.38%0.97%1.38%

Frequently Asked Questions


BLCN and LEAD have a correlation of 0.39, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BLCN has higher volatility (14.45%) compared to LEAD (4.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLCN dropped -67.51% vs LEAD's -32.19%.

On 5-year performance, LEAD leads with 12.16% vs -9.77% for BLCN. On fees, LEAD is cheaper at 0.43% per year. On volatility, LEAD has been the lower-risk option at 4.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, LEAD has performed better with a 12.16% return vs -9.77%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

LEAD is cheaper with a 0.43% expense ratio, compared with 0.68% for BLCN.

BLCN has the higher dividend yield at 2.66%, compared with 0.58% for LEAD.

BLCN is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while LEAD is Large Cap Growth Equities. BLCN tracks Siren NASDAQ Blockchain Economy Index, while LEAD tracks Siren DIVCON Leaders Dividend Index. Their fees differ too: 0.68% for BLCN and 0.43% for LEAD.

LEAD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.77 vs 0.76), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BLCN and LEAD

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