BNB-USD vs. MC.PA

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

BNB-USD (BNB) is a cryptocurrency, while MC.PA (LVMH Moët Hennessy - Louis Vuitton, Société Européenne) is a stock. Over the past 5 years, BNB-USD returned 10.55%/yr vs -4.26%/yr for MC.PA. At a 0.12 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

BNB-USD vs. MC.PA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in BNB (BNB-USD) and LVMH Moët Hennessy - Louis Vuitton, Société Européenne (MC.PA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Different Trading Currencies

BNB-USD is traded in USD, while MC.PA is traded in EUR. To make them comparable, the MC.PA values have been converted to USD using the latest available exchange rates.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BNB-USD achieves a -29.49% return, which is significantly lower than MC.PA's -20.77% return.

BNB-USD

• 1D: 0.91%
• 1M: -10.19%
• YTD: -29.49%
• 6M: -32.13%
• 1Y: -7.11%
• 3Y*: 36.86%
• 5Y*: 10.55%
• 10Y*: —

MC.PA

• 1D: 3.42%
• 1M: 9.82%
• YTD: -20.77%
• 6M: -18.13%
• 1Y: 13.59%
• 3Y*: -11.43%
• 5Y*: -4.26%
• 10Y*: 16.47%

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

BNB-USD vs. MC.PA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BNB-USD BNB	-29.49%	23.21%	124.36%	26.83%	-51.86%	1,277.47%	170.06%	126.63%	-29.71%	320.60%
MC.PA LVMH Moët Hennessy - Louis Vuitton, Société Européenne	-20.77%	17.89%	-17.19%	13.07%	-10.48%	34.03%	35.70%	60.00%	2.30%	0.43%

Correlation

The correlation between BNB-USD and MC.PA is 0.13, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.13
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.12
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 9, 2017	0.12

Return for Risk

BNB-USD vs. MC.PA — Risk / Return Rank

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

BNB-USD

BNB-USD Risk / Return Rank: 84
BNB-USD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
BNB-USD Sortino Ratio Rank: 83
BNB-USD Omega Ratio Rank: 82
BNB-USD Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
BNB-USD Martin Ratio Rank: 87

MC.PA

MC.PA Risk / Return Rank: 52
MC.PA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
MC.PA Sortino Ratio Rank: 51
MC.PA Omega Ratio Rank: 49
MC.PA Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
MC.PA Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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.

BNB-USD vs. MC.PA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for BNB (BNB-USD) and LVMH Moët Hennessy - Louis Vuitton, Société Européenne (MC.PA). 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.

	BNB-USD	MC.PA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.13	0.35	-0.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.18	0.76	-0.58
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.02	1.09	-0.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.13	0.37	-0.49
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.20	0.74	-0.94

BNB-USD vs. MC.PA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BNB-USD Sharpe Ratio is -0.13, which is lower than the MC.PA Sharpe Ratio of 0.35. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BNB-USD and MC.PA, 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

BNB-USD vs. MC.PA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BNB-USD drawdown since its inception was -79.74%, which is greater than MC.PA's maximum drawdown of -60.79%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BNB-USD and MC.PA.

Drawdown Indicators

	BNB-USD	MC.PA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-79.74%	-60.79%	-18.95%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-56.24%	-30.86%	-25.38%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-56.24%	-46.71%	-9.53%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-69.89%	-46.71%	-23.18%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-46.71%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-53.42%	-36.98%	-16.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-38.71%	-13.53%	-25.18%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	42.27%	15.44%	+26.83%

Volatility

BNB-USD vs. MC.PA - Volatility Comparison

BNB (BNB-USD) has a higher volatility of 17.28% compared to LVMH Moët Hennessy - Louis Vuitton, Société Européenne (MC.PA) at 8.30%. This indicates that BNB-USD's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MC.PA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BNB-USD	MC.PA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.28%	8.30%	+8.98%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.73%	22.76%	+11.97%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.38%	32.62%	+11.76%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	50.42%	32.30%	+18.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	80.06%	29.73%	+50.33%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BNB-USD and MC.PA in my portfolio?

BNB-USD and MC.PA have a correlation of 0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.