BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BLOK.L (First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF) and BCHS.L (Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc) are both Technology Equities funds tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD, from First Trust and Invesco respectively. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BLOK.L returned 13.02%/yr vs 12.62%/yr for BCHS.L. A 0.61 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.65% expense ratio.

Performance

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a £10,000 investment in First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF (BLOK.L) and Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc (BCHS.L). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLOK.L achieves a 12.48% return, which is significantly lower than BCHS.L's 26.66% return.

BLOK.L

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 7.30%
• YTD: 12.48%
• 6M: 15.11%
• 1Y: 31.97%
• 3Y*: 20.74%
• 5Y*: 13.02%
• 10Y*: —

BCHS.L

• 1D: -1.63%
• 1M: 10.46%
• YTD: 26.66%
• 6M: 16.86%
• 1Y: 61.41%
• 3Y*: 42.48%
• 5Y*: 12.62%
• 10Y*: —

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

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BLOK.L First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF	12.48%	22.34%	18.56%	14.77%	-8.98%	19.08%	15.05%	10.83%
BCHS.L Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc	26.66%	35.24%	18.50%	58.28%	-46.25%	26.00%	89.05%	13.21%

Correlation

The correlation between BLOK.L and BCHS.L is 0.56, 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	0.56
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.55
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.62
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 13, 2019	0.61

The correlation between BLOK.L and BCHS.L has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.55 to 0.61 - a consistent structural relationship.

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BLOK.L	BCHS.L
Financial Services	40.0%	57.4%
Technology	31.4%	30.6%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	6.4%
Communication Services	8.3%	3.9%
Industrials	5.6%	0.5%
Utilities	1.9%	1.2%
Basic Materials	1.6%	0.0%
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	0.0%
Healthcare	0.8%	0.0%
Energy	0.7%	0.0%
Real Estate	-	0.0%

Return for Risk

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L — Risk / Return Rank

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

BLOK.L

BLOK.L Risk / Return Rank: 80
BLOK.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
BLOK.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
BLOK.L Omega Ratio Rank: 79
BLOK.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
BLOK.L Martin Ratio Rank: 80

BCHS.L

BCHS.L Risk / Return Rank: 41
BCHS.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 48
BCHS.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 45
BCHS.L Omega Ratio Rank: 41
BCHS.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
BCHS.L Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF (BLOK.L) and Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc (BCHS.L). 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.

	BLOK.L	BCHS.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.58	1.63	+0.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.39	2.19	+1.20
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.26	+0.20
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	2.07	+2.30
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.63	4.20	+11.43
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLOK.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.58, which is higher than the BCHS.L Sharpe Ratio of 1.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLOK.L and BCHS.L, 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

	BLOK.L	BCHS.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.58	1.63	+0.95
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94	0.35	+0.59
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	0.71	+0.14

Drawdowns

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLOK.L drawdown since its inception was -26.23%, smaller than the maximum BCHS.L drawdown of -55.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLOK.L and BCHS.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLOK.L	BCHS.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.23%	-55.89%	+29.66%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.28%	-29.49%	+22.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.42%	-35.64%	+20.22%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.43%	-55.89%	+39.46%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.12%	-3.94%	+2.82%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.27%	-21.40%	+17.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	14.57%	-12.53%

Volatility

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF (BLOK.L) is 4.12%, while Invesco CoinShares Global Blockchain UCITS ETF Acc (BCHS.L) has a volatility of 10.49%. This indicates that BLOK.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BCHS.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BLOK.L	BCHS.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.12%	10.49%	-6.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.86%	24.68%	-15.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.33%	37.46%	-25.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.85%	35.61%	-21.76%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.14%	34.37%	-18.23%

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BLOK.L and BCHS.L have an expense ratio of 0.65%.

Dividends

BLOK.L vs. BCHS.L - Dividend Comparison

Neither BLOK.L nor BCHS.L has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BLOK.L and BCHS.L in my portfolio?

BLOK.L and BCHS.L have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which ETF is better, BLOK.L or BCHS.L?

Both ETFs have the same 0.65% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, BLOK.L or BCHS.L?

BLOK.L and BCHS.L have the same expense ratio: 0.65% per year.

What is the main difference between BLOK.L and BCHS.L?

Both ETFs track MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Invesco.