FEBZ vs. BCI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FEBZ (TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF) and BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FEBZ is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500 Price Index, while BCI is a Commodities fund actively managed by Aberdeen. FEBZ is passively managed, while BCI is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, FEBZ returned 11.22%/yr vs 11.07%/yr for BCI. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FEBZ charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for BCI.

Performance

FEBZ vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) 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, FEBZ achieves a 7.99% return, which is significantly lower than BCI's 26.68% return.

FEBZ

• 1D: -0.49%
• 1M: 4.07%
• YTD: 7.99%
• 6M: 7.75%
• 1Y: 20.13%
• 3Y*: 15.79%
• 5Y*: 11.22%
• 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)

FEBZ vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF	7.99%	12.97%	16.88%	20.65%	-10.32%	20.51%
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	26.68%	15.07%	5.47%	-8.79%	15.09%	21.41%

Correlation

The correlation between FEBZ and BCI is -0.08, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.08
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.09
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2021	0.19

The correlation between FEBZ and BCI shifts across timeframes, from -0.08 (1 year) to 0.19 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FEBZ vs. BCI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FEBZ	BCI
Technology	35.3%	-
Financial Services	13.4%	100.0%
Consumer Cyclical	10.6%	-
Communication Services	9.9%	-
Healthcare	8.8%	-
Industrials	7.8%	-
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	-
Energy	3.0%	-
Utilities	2.5%	-
Real Estate	2.0%	-
Basic Materials	1.6%	-

Return for Risk

FEBZ vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

FEBZ

FEBZ Risk / Return Rank: 65
FEBZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
FEBZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
FEBZ Omega Ratio Rank: 66
FEBZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 58
FEBZ Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

FEBZ vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) 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.

	FEBZ	BCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.17	2.30	-0.13
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.01	2.92	+0.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.41	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.83	5.10	-2.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.21	13.14	-0.93
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FEBZ vs. BCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FEBZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.17, which is comparable to the BCI Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FEBZ 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

	FEBZ	BCI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.17	2.30	-0.13
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.90	0.66	+0.24
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.00	0.48	+0.52

Drawdowns

FEBZ vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FEBZ drawdown since its inception was -17.50%, smaller than the maximum BCI drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FEBZ and BCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	FEBZ	BCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.50%	-32.69%	+15.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.14%	-7.61%	+0.47%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-14.68%	-11.38%	-3.30%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-17.50%	-26.50%	+9.00%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.49%	-4.52%	+4.03%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.32%	-12.00%	+8.68%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.65%	2.95%	-1.30%

Volatility

FEBZ vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF (FEBZ) is 2.29%, while abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a volatility of 5.16%. This indicates that FEBZ 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

	FEBZ	BCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.29%	5.16%	-2.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.09%	14.80%	-7.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.34%	16.92%	-7.58%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.47%	16.82%	-4.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.35%	15.65%	-3.30%

FEBZ vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

FEBZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than BCI's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

FEBZ vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

FEBZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.96%, 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%
FEBZ TrueShares Structured Outcome (February) ETF	2.96%	3.20%	3.88%	6.81%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FEBZ and BCI in my portfolio?

FEBZ and BCI have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FEBZ or BCI?

BCI has higher volatility (5.16%) compared to FEBZ (2.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FEBZ dropped -17.50% vs BCI's -32.69%.

Which ETF is better, FEBZ or BCI?

On 5-year performance, FEBZ leads with 11.22% vs 11.07% for BCI. On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FEBZ has been the lower-risk option at 2.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FEBZ or BCI?

Over the 5-year period, FEBZ has performed better with a 11.22% return vs 11.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FEBZ or BCI?

BCI is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for FEBZ.

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

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 2.96% for FEBZ.

What is the main difference between FEBZ and BCI?

FEBZ is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BCI is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for FEBZ and 0.25% for BCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 2.17), 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.