CRTC vs. BLOK

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CRTC (Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF) and BLOK (Amplify Transformational Data Sharing ETF) are both Technology Equities funds. CRTC is passively managed, while BLOK is actively managed. Over the past year, CRTC returned 23.78% vs 30.79% for BLOK. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. CRTC charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.71%/yr for BLOK.

Performance

CRTC vs. BLOK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC) and Amplify Transformational Data Sharing ETF (BLOK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CRTC achieves a 8.59% return, which is significantly lower than BLOK's 16.21% return.

CRTC

• 1D: -1.08%
• 1M: 4.98%
• YTD: 8.59%
• 6M: 8.79%
• 1Y: 23.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BLOK

• 1D: -2.62%
• 1M: 7.72%
• YTD: 16.21%
• 6M: 7.24%
• 1Y: 30.79%
• 3Y*: 51.34%
• 5Y*: 11.96%
• 10Y*: —

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

CRTC vs. BLOK - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	8.59%	18.69%	18.05%	7.18%
BLOK Amplify Transformational Data Sharing ETF	16.21%	32.64%	53.12%	36.08%

Correlation

The correlation between CRTC and BLOK is 0.71, 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	0.71
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 17, 2023	0.67

The correlation between CRTC and BLOK has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

CRTC vs. BLOK - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CRTC	BLOK
Technology	33.5%	31.8%
Communication Services	16.0%	5.2%
Healthcare	14.1%	-
Industrials	14.1%	1.0%
Energy	7.1%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	6.7%
Utilities	6.0%	-
Basic Materials	2.6%	-
Financial Services	0.2%	55.3%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.0%
Consumer Defensive	0.0%	-

Return for Risk

CRTC vs. BLOK — Risk / Return Rank

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

CRTC

CRTC Risk / Return Rank: 55
CRTC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 55
CRTC Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
CRTC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
CRTC Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
CRTC Martin Ratio Rank: 57

BLOK

BLOK Risk / Return Rank: 21
BLOK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 23
BLOK Sortino Ratio Rank: 23
BLOK Omega Ratio Rank: 23
BLOK Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
BLOK Martin Ratio Rank: 18

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.

CRTC vs. BLOK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC) and Amplify Transformational Data Sharing ETF (BLOK). 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.

	CRTC	BLOK	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	0.81	+1.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.56	1.30	+1.26
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.16	+0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.64	0.87	+1.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.88	1.90	+7.98
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CRTC vs. BLOK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CRTC Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is higher than the BLOK Sharpe Ratio of 0.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CRTC and BLOK, 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

	CRTC	BLOK	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.87	0.81	+1.06
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.28	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.36	0.48	+0.88

Drawdowns

CRTC vs. BLOK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CRTC drawdown since its inception was -19.07%, smaller than the maximum BLOK drawdown of -73.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CRTC and BLOK.

Drawdown Indicators

	CRTC	BLOK	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.07%	-73.33%	+54.26%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.05%	-35.64%	+26.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-35.64%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-73.33%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.27%	-10.16%	+8.89%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.13%	-26.08%	+23.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.41%	16.23%	-13.82%

Volatility

CRTC vs. BLOK - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF (CRTC) is 3.20%, while Amplify Transformational Data Sharing ETF (BLOK) has a volatility of 10.59%. This indicates that CRTC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BLOK based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CRTC	BLOK	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.20%	10.59%	-7.39%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.64%	28.55%	-18.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.76%	38.29%	-25.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.73%	42.36%	-26.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.73%	38.97%	-23.24%

CRTC vs. BLOK - Expense Ratio Comparison

CRTC has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is lower than BLOK's 0.71% expense ratio.

Dividends

CRTC vs. BLOK - Dividend Comparison

CRTC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, more than BLOK's 0.62% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BLOK Amplify Transformational Data Sharing ETF	0.62%	0.72%	6.00%	1.15%	0.00%	14.31%	1.88%	2.05%	1.30%
CRTC Xtrackers US National Critical Technologies ETF	1.00%	1.03%	1.13%	0.16%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CRTC and BLOK in my portfolio?

CRTC and BLOK have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, CRTC or BLOK?

BLOK has higher volatility (10.59%) compared to CRTC (3.20%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CRTC dropped -19.07% vs BLOK's -73.33%.

Which ETF is better, CRTC or BLOK?

On 1-year performance, BLOK leads with 30.79% vs 23.78% for CRTC. On fees, CRTC is cheaper at 0.35% per year. On volatility, CRTC has been the lower-risk option at 3.20%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CRTC or BLOK?

Over the 1-year period, BLOK has performed better with a 30.79% return vs 23.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CRTC or BLOK?

CRTC is cheaper with a 0.35% expense ratio, compared with 0.71% for BLOK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CRTC or BLOK?

CRTC has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.62% for BLOK.

What is the main difference between CRTC and BLOK?

They also come from different issuers: Xtrackers and Amplify. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CRTC and 0.71% for BLOK.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CRTC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 0.81), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.