PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FAAR vs. BCI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FAAR vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FAAR achieves a 19.14% return, which is significantly higher than BCI's 15.26% return.


FAAR

1D
-0.91%
1M
-5.21%
YTD
19.14%
6M
18.06%
1Y
28.33%
3Y*
10.57%
5Y*
7.72%
10Y*
4.69%

BCI

1D
-1.23%
1M
-9.78%
YTD
15.26%
6M
13.54%
1Y
23.04%
3Y*
11.40%
5Y*
9.52%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FAAR vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FAAR
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF
19.14%8.07%5.97%-5.63%10.15%12.34%8.60%-1.28%-9.17%3.99%
BCI
abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF
15.26%15.07%5.47%-8.79%15.09%26.18%-2.77%7.06%-11.21%3.81%

Correlation

The correlation between FAAR and BCI is 0.69, 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

0.69

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.49

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.50

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 31, 2017

0.43

Over the past year, FAAR and BCI have become more correlated (0.69) than their long-term average of 0.43, meaning their price movements have been converging.

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

FAAR vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

FAAR
FAAR Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
FAAR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FAAR Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
FAAR Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
FAAR Calmar Ratio Rank: 8686
Calmar Ratio Rank
FAAR Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank

BCI
BCI Risk / Return Rank: 3939
Overall Rank
BCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 3737
Sortino Ratio Rank
BCI Omega Ratio Rank: 3939
Omega Ratio Rank
BCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 3636
Calmar Ratio Rank
BCI Martin Ratio Rank: 4444
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FAAR vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


FAARBCIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.80

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.25

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.37

1.25

+0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.52

1.76

+2.76

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.18

6.95

+8.23

FAAR vs. BCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FAAR Sharpe Ratio is 2.15, which is higher than the BCI Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FAAR 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

FAAR vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FAAR drawdown since its inception was -18.03%, smaller than the maximum BCI drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FAAR and BCI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FAARBCIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-18.03%

-32.69%

+14.66%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.29%

-13.12%

+6.83%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-11.54%

-13.12%

+1.58%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-18.03%

-26.50%

+8.47%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-18.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-6.29%

-13.12%

+6.83%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.82%

-11.99%

+4.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.87%

3.34%

-1.47%

Volatility

FAAR vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF (FAAR) is 2.55%, while abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a volatility of 3.55%. This indicates that FAAR 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FAARBCIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.55%

3.55%

-1.00%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.68%

14.98%

-5.30%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.38%

17.20%

-3.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.96%

16.79%

-3.83%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

11.54%

15.65%

-4.11%

FAAR vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

FAAR has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BCI's 0.26% expense ratio.


Dividends

FAAR vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

FAAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.66%, less than BCI's 14.30% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
BCI
abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF
14.30%16.49%3.29%3.93%19.98%19.43%0.68%1.47%1.13%5.02%
FAAR
First Trust Alternative Absolute Return Strategy ETF
9.66%11.63%3.45%3.20%5.82%6.49%3.05%1.02%0.58%2.83%

Frequently Asked Questions


FAAR and BCI have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BCI has higher volatility (3.55%) compared to FAAR (2.55%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FAAR dropped -18.03% vs BCI's -32.69%.

On 5-year performance, BCI leads with 9.52% vs 7.72% for FAAR. On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.26% per year. On volatility, FAAR has been the lower-risk option at 2.55%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, BCI has performed better with a 9.52% return vs 7.72%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BCI is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for FAAR.

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 14.30%, compared with 9.66% for FAAR.

They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for FAAR and 0.26% for BCI.

FAAR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.15 vs 1.36), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FAAR and BCI

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