ETHA vs. GDLC

Last updated Apr 1, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Ethereum Trust ETF (ETHA) and Grayscale CoinDesk Crypto 5 ETF (GDLC).

ETHA and GDLC are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. ETHA is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the CME CF Ether-Dollar Reference Rate-New York Variant. It was launched on Jun 24, 2024. GDLC is a passively managed fund by Grayscale that tracks the performance of the CoinDesk 5 Index. It was launched on Feb 1, 2018. Both ETHA and GDLC 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

ETHA vs. GDLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Ethereum Trust ETF (ETHA) and Grayscale CoinDesk Crypto 5 ETF (GDLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

ETHA vs. GDLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
ETHA iShares Ethereum Trust ETF	-29.42%	-11.31%	-3.62%
GDLC Grayscale CoinDesk Crypto 5 ETF	-24.52%	0.45%	75.89%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ETHA achieves a -29.42% return, which is significantly lower than GDLC's -24.52% return.

ETHA

• 1D: 3.67%
• 1M: 9.02%
• YTD: -29.42%
• 6M: -49.76%
• 1Y: 14.54%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GDLC

• 1D: 2.20%
• 1M: 3.93%
• YTD: -24.52%
• 6M: -44.20%
• 1Y: -10.19%
• 3Y*: 65.34%
• 5Y*: -3.20%
• 10Y*: —

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

ETHA vs. GDLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

ETHA has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than GDLC's 0.59% expense ratio.

GDLC

Grayscale CoinDesk Crypto 5 ETF

ETHA

iShares Ethereum Trust ETF

Return for Risk

ETHA vs. GDLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

ETHA

ETHA Risk / Return Rank: 21
ETHA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 18
ETHA Sortino Ratio Rank: 31
ETHA Omega Ratio Rank: 26
ETHA Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
ETHA Martin Ratio Rank: 15

GDLC

GDLC Risk / Return Rank: 10
GDLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
GDLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
GDLC Omega Ratio Rank: 11
GDLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
GDLC Martin Ratio Rank: 9

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.

ETHA vs. GDLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Ethereum Trust ETF (ETHA) and Grayscale CoinDesk Crypto 5 ETF (GDLC). 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.

	ETHA	GDLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.19	-0.20	+0.39
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.85	0.06	+0.79
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.10	1.01	+0.09
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.19	-0.19	+0.39
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.39	-0.41	+0.80
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ETHA vs. GDLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ETHA Sharpe Ratio is 0.19, which is higher than the GDLC Sharpe Ratio of -0.20. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ETHA and GDLC, offering insights into how both investments have performed under varying market conditions. These values are calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ETHA	GDLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.19	-0.20	+0.39
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.04	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.35	0.31	-0.66

Correlation

The correlation between ETHA and GDLC is 0.82, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

ETHA vs. GDLC - Dividend Comparison

Neither ETHA nor GDLC has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Drawdowns

ETHA vs. GDLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ETHA drawdown since its inception was -64.02%, smaller than the maximum GDLC drawdown of -94.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ETHA and GDLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	ETHA	GDLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-64.02%	-94.14%	+30.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-61.66%	-52.91%	-8.75%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-94.14%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-56.74%	-51.45%	-5.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-30.40%	-52.90%	+22.50%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.40%	24.86%	+5.54%

Volatility

ETHA vs. GDLC - Volatility Comparison

iShares Ethereum Trust ETF (ETHA) has a higher volatility of 19.30% compared to Grayscale CoinDesk Crypto 5 ETF (GDLC) at 13.67%. This indicates that ETHA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GDLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ETHA	GDLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	19.30%	13.67%	+5.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	53.69%	40.43%	+13.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	76.12%	50.42%	+25.70%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	75.10%	77.87%	-2.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	75.10%	95.02%	-19.92%