BLOK.L vs. FCBR.L

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

BLOK.L (First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF) and FCBR.L (First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation) are both Technology Equities funds from First Trust tracking the MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, BLOK.L returned 13.02%/yr vs 15.80%/yr for FCBR.L. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BLOK.L charges 0.65%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for FCBR.L.

Performance

BLOK.L vs. FCBR.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 First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (FCBR.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 FCBR.L's 25.54% 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*: —

FCBR.L

• 1D: -2.54%
• 1M: 29.92%
• YTD: 25.54%
• 6M: 20.34%
• 1Y: 22.73%
• 3Y*: 22.18%
• 5Y*: 15.80%
• 10Y*: —

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

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

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BLOK.L First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF	12.48%	22.34%	18.56%	14.77%	-8.98%	19.08%	22.15%
FCBR.L First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation	25.54%	-0.06%	20.93%	33.00%	-18.86%	21.41%	27.00%

Correlation

The correlation between BLOK.L and FCBR.L is 0.48, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.48
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.57
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 1, 2020	0.58

The correlation between BLOK.L and FCBR.L shifts across timeframes, from 0.48 (1 year) to 0.58 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

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

Sectors	BLOK.L	FCBR.L
Financial Services	40.0%	-
Technology	31.4%	96.4%
Consumer Cyclical	8.4%	-
Communication Services	8.3%	2.1%
Industrials	5.6%	1.5%
Utilities	1.9%	-
Basic Materials	1.6%	-
Consumer Defensive	1.3%	-
Healthcare	0.8%	-
Energy	0.7%	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

BLOK.L vs. FCBR.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

FCBR.L

FCBR.L Risk / Return Rank: 24
FCBR.L Sharpe Ratio Rank: 26
FCBR.L Sortino Ratio Rank: 26
FCBR.L Omega Ratio Rank: 29
FCBR.L Calmar Ratio Rank: 21
FCBR.L Martin Ratio Rank: 20

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. FCBR.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 First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (FCBR.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	FCBR.L	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.58	0.91	+1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.39	1.41	+1.98
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.19	+0.27
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.37	0.93	+3.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.63	2.13	+13.50
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

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

The current BLOK.L Sharpe Ratio is 2.58, which is higher than the FCBR.L Sharpe Ratio of 0.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLOK.L and FCBR.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	FCBR.L	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.58	0.91	+1.67
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94	0.69	+0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	0.73	+0.12

Drawdowns

BLOK.L vs. FCBR.L - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLOK.L drawdown since its inception was -26.23%, roughly equal to the maximum FCBR.L drawdown of -26.10%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLOK.L and FCBR.L.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLOK.L	FCBR.L	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-26.23%	-26.10%	-0.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.28%	-24.30%	+17.02%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.42%	-25.43%	+10.01%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-16.43%	-26.10%	+9.67%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.12%	-3.10%	+1.98%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.27%	-9.01%	+4.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	10.62%	-8.58%

Volatility

BLOK.L vs. FCBR.L - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process UCITS ETF (BLOK.L) is 4.12%, while First Trust Nasdaq Cybersecurity UCITS ETF Class A USD Accumulation (FCBR.L) has a volatility of 11.50%. This indicates that BLOK.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FCBR.L based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BLOK.L	FCBR.L	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.12%	11.50%	-7.38%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.86%	21.74%	-12.88%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.33%	24.76%	-12.43%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.85%	22.88%	-9.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.14%	22.82%	-6.68%

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

BLOK.L has a 0.65% expense ratio, which is higher than FCBR.L's 0.60% expense ratio.

Dividends

BLOK.L vs. FCBR.L - Dividend Comparison

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

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

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

BLOK.L and FCBR.L have a correlation of 0.48, 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 FCBR.L?

On fees, FCBR.L is cheaper at 0.60% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

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

FCBR.L is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 0.65% for BLOK.L.

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

Both ETFs track MSCI World/Information Tech NR USD. Their fees differ too: 0.65% for BLOK.L and 0.60% for FCBR.L.