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

Performance

FTGC vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) 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, FTGC achieves a 18.86% return, which is significantly higher than BCI's 15.26% return.


FTGC

1D
-1.14%
1M
-7.37%
YTD
18.86%
6M
17.54%
1Y
28.18%
3Y*
14.26%
5Y*
12.29%
10Y*
7.15%

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)

FTGC vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FTGC
First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund
18.86%14.61%9.96%-5.36%17.36%27.95%2.17%6.40%-12.75%3.59%
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 FTGC and BCI is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.95

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

0.93

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

0.92

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

0.89

The correlation between FTGC and BCI has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.94 - 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

FTGC vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

FTGC
FTGC Risk / Return Rank: 5555
Overall Rank
FTGC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FTGC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5353
Sortino Ratio Rank
FTGC Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
FTGC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5555
Calmar Ratio Rank
FTGC Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
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.

FTGC vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) 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.


FTGCBCIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.47

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.62

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.25

+0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.60

1.76

+0.84

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.67

6.95

+2.72

FTGC vs. BCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTGC Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is higher than the BCI Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTGC 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

FTGC vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTGC drawdown since its inception was -59.47%, which is greater than BCI's maximum drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTGC and BCI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FTGCBCIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-59.47%

-32.69%

-26.78%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.87%

-13.12%

+2.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-10.87%

-13.12%

+2.25%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.64%

-26.50%

+3.86%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.91%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-10.87%

-13.12%

+2.25%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-27.34%

-11.99%

-15.35%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.94%

3.34%

-0.40%

Volatility

FTGC vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) is 3.07%, while abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a volatility of 3.55%. This indicates that FTGC 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


FTGCBCIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.07%

3.55%

-0.48%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.21%

14.98%

-1.77%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.70%

17.20%

-1.50%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.87%

16.79%

-0.92%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

14.71%

15.65%

-0.94%

FTGC vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

FTGC vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

FTGC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 16.13%, more 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%
FTGC
First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund
16.13%17.74%3.05%3.34%10.35%7.21%0.00%0.81%0.80%1.21%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, FTGC and BCI move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

BCI has higher volatility (3.55%) compared to FTGC (3.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FTGC dropped -59.47% vs BCI's -32.69%.

On 5-year performance, FTGC leads with 12.29% vs 9.52% for BCI. On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.26% per year. On volatility, FTGC has been the lower-risk option at 3.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, FTGC has performed better with a 12.29% return vs 9.52%. 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 FTGC.

FTGC has the higher dividend yield at 16.13%, compared with 14.30% for BCI.

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

FTGC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.82 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 FTGC 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