BSCZ vs. XLG

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco BulletShares 2035 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCZ) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG).

BSCZ and XLG are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. BSCZ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the BulletShares® USD Corporate Bond 2035 Index. It was launched on Jun 11, 2025. XLG is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. It was launched on May 4, 2005. Both BSCZ and XLG are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

BSCZ vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco BulletShares 2035 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCZ) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

BSCZ vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BSCZ Invesco BulletShares 2035 Corporate Bond ETF	-0.38%	5.67%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	-7.82%	18.07%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BSCZ achieves a -0.38% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's -7.82% return.

BSCZ

• 1D: 0.66%
• 1M: -2.01%
• YTD: -0.38%
• 6M: 0.69%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XLG

• 1D: 3.26%
• 1M: -4.33%
• YTD: -7.82%
• 6M: -4.84%
• 1Y: 19.36%
• 3Y*: 21.64%
• 5Y*: 13.80%
• 10Y*: 15.64%

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

BSCZ vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BSCZ has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is lower than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

XLG

Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF

BSCZ

Invesco BulletShares 2035 Corporate Bond ETF

Return for Risk

BSCZ vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 63
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 64
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 67
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

BSCZ vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2035 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCZ) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BSCZ	XLG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	0.97	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.74	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.83	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.34	0.58	+0.76

Correlation

The correlation between BSCZ and XLG is 0.26, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.

Dividends

BSCZ vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

BSCZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.25%, more than XLG's 0.70% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BSCZ Invesco BulletShares 2035 Corporate Bond ETF	3.25%	2.18%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.70%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Drawdowns

BSCZ vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BSCZ drawdown since its inception was -3.28%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSCZ and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	BSCZ	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.28%	-52.39%	+49.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-12.41%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.02%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.01%	-9.56%	+7.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.58%	-7.69%	+7.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.49%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	BSCZ	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	5.76%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	10.64%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.98%	19.97%	-14.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.98%	18.69%	-13.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.98%	18.81%	-13.83%