ETHA vs. IBLC
ETHA (iShares Ethereum Trust ETF) and IBLC (iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds from iShares - ETHA tracks the CME CF Ether Dollar Reference Rate - New York Variant while IBLC tracks the ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, ETHA returned -31.79% vs 73.27% for IBLC. A 0.68 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ETHA charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IBLC.
Performance
ETHA vs. IBLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ETHA achieves a -39.46% return, which is significantly lower than IBLC's 32.34% return.
ETHA
- 1D
- -5.56%
- 1M
- -23.58%
- YTD
- -39.46%
- 6M
- -42.75%
- 1Y
- -31.79%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IBLC
- 1D
- -3.00%
- 1M
- 13.52%
- YTD
- 32.34%
- 6M
- 15.25%
- 1Y
- 73.27%
- 3Y*
- 48.31%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ETHA vs. IBLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
ETHA iShares Ethereum Trust ETF | -39.46% | -11.31% | -3.62% |
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF | 32.34% | 27.05% | -3.74% |
Correlation
The correlation between ETHA and IBLC is 0.66, 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 | 0.66 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 24, 2024 | 0.68 |
The correlation between ETHA and IBLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.66 to 0.68 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
ETHA vs. IBLC — Risk / Return Rank
ETHA
IBLC
ETHA vs. IBLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Ethereum Trust ETF (ETHA) and iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC). 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 | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.23 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.97 | 1.23 | -0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.51 | 1.64 | -2.15 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.84 | 3.26 | -4.10 |
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
| ETHA | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.47 | 1.34 | -1.81 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.41 | 0.40 | -0.81 |
Drawdowns
ETHA vs. IBLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ETHA drawdown since its inception was -64.02%, roughly equal to the maximum IBLC drawdown of -62.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ETHA and IBLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ETHA | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -64.02% | -62.54% | -1.48% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -62.89% | -44.94% | -17.95% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -51.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -62.89% | -12.99% | -49.90% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -32.65% | -25.89% | -6.76% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 37.73% | 22.56% | +15.17% |
Volatility
ETHA vs. IBLC - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Ethereum Trust ETF (ETHA) is 10.15%, while iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) has a volatility of 14.67%. This indicates that ETHA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ETHA | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.15% | 14.67% | -4.52% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 46.25% | 40.76% | +5.49% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 68.61% | 54.94% | +13.67% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 72.53% | 64.49% | +8.04% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 72.53% | 64.49% | +8.04% |
ETHA vs. IBLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
ETHA has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than IBLC's 0.47% expense ratio.
Dividends
ETHA vs. IBLC - Dividend Comparison
ETHA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.77%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ETHA iShares Ethereum Trust ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF | 4.77% | 6.31% | 1.60% | 1.79% | 0.84% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ETHA and IBLC have a correlation of 0.66, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IBLC has higher volatility (14.67%) compared to ETHA (10.15%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ETHA dropped -64.02% vs IBLC's -62.54%.
On 1-year performance, IBLC leads with 73.27% vs -31.79% for ETHA. On fees, ETHA is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, ETHA has been the lower-risk option at 10.15%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IBLC has performed better with a 73.27% return vs -31.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ETHA is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for IBLC.
IBLC has the higher dividend yield at 4.77%, compared with 0.00% for ETHA.
ETHA tracks CME CF Ether Dollar Reference Rate - New York Variant, while IBLC tracks ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for ETHA and 0.47% for IBLC.
IBLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 vs -0.47), 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.
Find the right allocation for ETHA and IBLC
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