CRPA.L vs. BTCI
CRPA.L (iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc)) and BTCI (NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CRPA.L is a Global Corporate Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg Gbl Agg Corp TR USD, while BTCI is a Cryptocurrency fund actively managed by Neos. CRPA.L is passively managed, while BTCI is actively managed. Over the past year, CRPA.L returned 4.68% vs -34.52% for BTCI. At a 0.09 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. CRPA.L charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.99%/yr for BTCI.
Performance
CRPA.L vs. BTCI - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CRPA.L achieves a 0.14% return, which is significantly higher than BTCI's -24.80% return.
CRPA.L
- 1D
- 0.27%
- 1M
- 0.30%
- YTD
- 0.14%
- 6M
- 0.52%
- 1Y
- 4.68%
- 3Y*
- 5.87%
- 5Y*
- 0.07%
- 10Y*
- —
BTCI
- 1D
- -2.67%
- 1M
- -19.78%
- YTD
- -24.80%
- 6M
- -28.14%
- 1Y
- -34.52%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CRPA.L vs. BTCI - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
CRPA.L iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.14% | 9.97% | -2.25% |
BTCI NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF | -24.80% | -1.09% | 28.24% |
Correlation
The correlation between CRPA.L and BTCI is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.18 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 18, 2024 | 0.09 |
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
CRPA.L vs. BTCI — Risk / Return Rank
CRPA.L
BTCI
CRPA.L vs. BTCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CRPA.L) and NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI). 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.
| CRPA.L | BTCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.53 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.16 | 0.86 | +0.30 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.28 | -0.77 | +2.05 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.01 | -1.37 | +5.38 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| CRPA.L | BTCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.92 | -0.89 | +1.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.01 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.33 | -0.07 | +0.40 |
Drawdowns
CRPA.L vs. BTCI - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CRPA.L drawdown since its inception was -25.34%, smaller than the maximum BTCI drawdown of -44.98%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRPA.L and BTCI.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| CRPA.L | BTCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -25.34% | -44.98% | +19.64% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.64% | -44.98% | +41.34% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -6.08% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.82% | -44.39% | +42.57% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.04% | -15.25% | +8.21% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.16% | 25.20% | -24.04% |
Volatility
CRPA.L vs. BTCI - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) (CRPA.L) is 1.91%, while NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI) has a volatility of 8.15%. This indicates that CRPA.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BTCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| CRPA.L | BTCI | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.91% | 8.15% | -6.24% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.93% | 30.49% | -26.56% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 5.12% | 38.98% | -33.86% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.77% | 40.12% | -33.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.78% | 40.12% | -33.34% |
CRPA.L vs. BTCI - Expense Ratio Comparison
CRPA.L has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than BTCI's 0.99% expense ratio.
Dividends
CRPA.L vs. BTCI - Dividend Comparison
CRPA.L has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BTCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 44.34%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 |
|---|---|---|---|
BTCI NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF | 44.34% | 36.46% | 6.76% |
CRPA.L iShares Global Corporate Bond UCITS ETF USD (Acc) | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
CRPA.L and BTCI have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CRPA.L is cheaper at 0.20% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CRPA.L is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.99% for BTCI.
CRPA.L is categorized as Global Corporate Bonds, while BTCI is Cryptocurrency. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Neos. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for CRPA.L and 0.99% for BTCI.
Find the right allocation for CRPA.L and BTCI
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