EDGH vs. BCI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

EDGH (3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF) and BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) are both Commodities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, EDGH returned 31.24% vs 38.68% for BCI. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. EDGH charges 1.01%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for BCI.

Performance

EDGH vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, EDGH achieves a 12.49% return, which is significantly lower than BCI's 26.68% return.

EDGH

• 1D: -0.45%
• 1M: -1.84%
• YTD: 12.49%
• 6M: 14.30%
• 1Y: 31.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BCI

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: -3.06%
• YTD: 26.68%
• 6M: 25.55%
• 1Y: 38.68%
• 3Y*: 15.96%
• 5Y*: 11.07%
• 10Y*: —

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

EDGH vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
EDGH 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF	12.49%	28.98%	-1.99%
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	26.68%	15.07%	-2.30%

Correlation

The correlation between EDGH and BCI is 0.68, 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	0.68
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2024	0.70

The correlation between EDGH and BCI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

EDGH vs. BCI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	EDGH	BCI
Financial Services	92.7%	100.0%
Basic Materials	7.3%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

EDGH vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

EDGH

EDGH Risk / Return Rank: 54
EDGH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
EDGH Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
EDGH Omega Ratio Rank: 60
EDGH Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
EDGH Martin Ratio Rank: 57

BCI

BCI Risk / Return Rank: 71
BCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
BCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
BCI Omega Ratio Rank: 67
BCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
BCI Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

EDGH vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). 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.

	EDGH	BCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.77	2.30	-0.53
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.15	2.92	-0.76
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	1.41	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.96	5.10	-2.14
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.70	13.14	-3.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

EDGH vs. BCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current EDGH Sharpe Ratio is 1.77, which is comparable to the BCI Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of EDGH and BCI, 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

	EDGH	BCI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.77	2.30	-0.53
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.66	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.53	0.48	+1.05

Drawdowns

EDGH vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum EDGH drawdown since its inception was -10.60%, smaller than the maximum BCI drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EDGH and BCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	EDGH	BCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.60%	-32.69%	+22.09%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.60%	-7.61%	-2.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-11.38%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.50%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.80%	-4.52%	-0.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.04%	-12.00%	+9.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.23%	2.95%	+0.28%

Volatility

EDGH vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF (EDGH) is 3.01%, while abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a volatility of 5.16%. This indicates that EDGH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	EDGH	BCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.01%	5.16%	-2.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.72%	14.80%	-0.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.72%	16.92%	+0.80%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.60%	16.82%	-1.22%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.60%	15.65%	-0.05%

EDGH vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

EDGH has a 1.01% expense ratio, which is higher than BCI's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

EDGH vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

EDGH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.05%, less than BCI's 13.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	13.01%	16.49%	3.29%	3.93%	19.98%	19.43%	0.68%	1.47%	1.13%	5.02%
EDGH 3EDGE Dynamic Hard Assets ETF	1.05%	1.18%	3.19%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both EDGH and BCI in my portfolio?

EDGH and BCI have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, EDGH or BCI?

BCI has higher volatility (5.16%) compared to EDGH (3.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EDGH dropped -10.60% vs BCI's -32.69%.

Which ETF is better, EDGH or BCI?

On 1-year performance, BCI leads with 38.68% vs 31.24% for EDGH. On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, EDGH has been the lower-risk option at 3.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, EDGH or BCI?

Over the 1-year period, BCI has performed better with a 38.68% return vs 31.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, EDGH or BCI?

BCI is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 1.01% for EDGH.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, EDGH or BCI?

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 1.05% for EDGH.

What is the main difference between EDGH and BCI?

They also come from different issuers: 3EDGE Asset Management and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 1.01% for EDGH and 0.25% for BCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.77), 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.