GLCB.L vs. BMAX
Compare and contrast key facts about SPDR Refinitiv Global Convertible Bond UCITS ETF (GLCB.L) and REX Bitcoin Corporate Treasury Convertible Bond ETF (BMAX).
GLCB.L and BMAX are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. GLCB.L is a passively managed fund by State Street that tracks the performance of the Refinitiv Global CB TR USD. It was launched on Oct 14, 2014. BMAX is an actively managed fund by REX. It was launched on Mar 13, 2025.
Performance
GLCB.L vs. BMAX - Performance Comparison
Loading graphics...
GLCB.L vs. BMAX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
GLCB.L SPDR Refinitiv Global Convertible Bond UCITS ETF | 69.41% | 98.39% |
BMAX REX Bitcoin Corporate Treasury Convertible Bond ETF | 1.32% | -16.51% |
Different Trading Currencies
GLCB.L is traded in GBp, while BMAX is traded in USD. To make them comparable, the BMAX values have been converted to GBp using the latest available exchange rates.
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, GLCB.L achieves a 69.41% return, which is significantly higher than BMAX's 1.32% return.
GLCB.L
- 1D
- -0.01%
- 1M
- -5.12%
- YTD
- 69.41%
- 6M
- 75.53%
- 1Y
- 237.52%
- 3Y*
- 158.89%
- 5Y*
- 90.93%
- 10Y*
- —
BMAX
- 1D
- 0.16%
- 1M
- -1.87%
- YTD
- 1.32%
- 6M
- -18.87%
- 1Y
- -14.08%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
GLCB.L vs. BMAX - Expense Ratio Comparison
GLCB.L has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BMAX's 1.14% expense ratio.
Return for Risk
GLCB.L vs. BMAX — Risk / Return Rank
GLCB.L
BMAX
GLCB.L vs. BMAX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR Refinitiv Global Convertible Bond UCITS ETF (GLCB.L) and REX Bitcoin Corporate Treasury Convertible Bond ETF (BMAX). 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.
| GLCB.L | BMAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.42 | -0.44 | +2.87 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 22.33 | -0.47 | +22.80 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 4.00 | 0.94 | +3.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 46.40 | -0.36 | +46.76 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 144.58 | -0.62 | +145.21 |
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 graphics...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| GLCB.L | BMAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.42 | -0.44 | +2.87 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 1.36 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.50 | -0.46 | +1.95 |
Correlation
The correlation between GLCB.L and BMAX is 0.26, which is considered to be low. This implies their price changes are not closely related. A low correlation is generally favorable for portfolio diversification, as it helps to reduce overall risk by spreading it across multiple assets with different performance patterns.
Dividends
GLCB.L vs. BMAX - Dividend Comparison
GLCB.L's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 74.78%, while BMAX has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GLCB.L SPDR Refinitiv Global Convertible Bond UCITS ETF | 74.78% | 77.76% | 55.57% | 26.13% | 27.42% | 19.20% | 35.35% | 48.00% | 23.37% |
BMAX REX Bitcoin Corporate Treasury Convertible Bond ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Drawdowns
GLCB.L vs. BMAX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum GLCB.L drawdown since its inception was -15.28%, smaller than the maximum BMAX drawdown of -31.89%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLCB.L and BMAX.
Loading graphics...
Drawdown Indicators
| GLCB.L | BMAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.28% | -31.32% | +16.04% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.12% | -31.32% | +26.20% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.65% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.12% | -28.90% | +23.78% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.57% | -15.10% | +12.53% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.64% | 18.53% | -16.89% |
Volatility
GLCB.L vs. BMAX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for SPDR Refinitiv Global Convertible Bond UCITS ETF (GLCB.L) is 4.07%, while REX Bitcoin Corporate Treasury Convertible Bond ETF (BMAX) has a volatility of 6.20%. This indicates that GLCB.L experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BMAX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading graphics...
Volatility by Period
| GLCB.L | BMAX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.07% | 6.20% | -2.13% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 52.17% | 18.85% | +33.32% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 98.44% | 31.95% | +66.49% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 67.03% | 32.40% | +34.63% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 59.46% | 32.40% | +27.06% |