GLNK vs. BITS

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

GLNK (Grayscale Chainlink Trust ETF) and BITS (Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds - GLNK tracks the Chainlink (LINK) while BITS tracks the NONE. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, GLNK returned -18.59%/yr vs 35.02%/yr for BITS. Their 0.33 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. GLNK charges 2.50%/yr vs 0.65%/yr for BITS.

Performance

GLNK vs. BITS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Grayscale Chainlink Trust ETF (GLNK) and Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GLNK achieves a -33.13% return, which is significantly lower than BITS's -8.84% return.

GLNK

• 1D: 0.76%
• 1M: 5.89%
• 6M: -15.88%
• YTD: -33.13%
• 1Y: -73.43%
• 3Y*: -18.59%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -2.20%

BITS

• 1D: 2.70%
• 1M: 2.05%
• 6M: -8.08%
• YTD: -8.84%
• 1Y: -6.58%
• 3Y*: 35.02%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: -1.69%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BITS Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF	$95.25K	$88.47K	$160.88K
GLNK Grayscale Chainlink Trust ETF	$2.64M	$1.96M	$1.98M

GLNK vs. BITS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
GLNK Grayscale Chainlink Trust ETF	-33.13%	-87.10%	38.45%	840.06%	-18.87%
BITS Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF	-8.84%	14.90%	61.84%	212.23%	-50.07%

Correlation

The correlation between GLNK and BITS is 0.62, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.62
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.40
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 19, 2022	0.33

Over the past year, GLNK and BITS have become more correlated (0.62) than their long-term average of 0.33, meaning their price movements have been converging.

Return for Risk

GLNK vs. BITS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

GLNK

GLNK Risk / Return Rank: 3
GLNK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
GLNK Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
GLNK Omega Ratio Rank: 3
GLNK Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
GLNK Martin Ratio Rank: 5

BITS

BITS Risk / Return Rank: 10
BITS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9
BITS Sortino Ratio Rank: 12
BITS Omega Ratio Rank: 12
BITS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9
BITS Martin Ratio Rank: 9

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

GLNK vs. BITS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Grayscale Chainlink Trust ETF (GLNK) and Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS). 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.

	GLNK	BITS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.74	-0.12	-0.62
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.18	0.21	-1.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	1.02	-0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.82	-0.14	-0.69
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.98	-0.22	-0.75

GLNK vs. BITS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GLNK Sharpe Ratio is -0.74, which is lower than the BITS Sharpe Ratio of -0.12. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GLNK and BITS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GLNK vs. BITS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GLNK drawdown since its inception was -96.25%, which is greater than BITS's maximum drawdown of -83.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GLNK and BITS.

Drawdown Indicators

	GLNK	BITS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-96.25%	-83.11%	-13.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-89.50%	-48.38%	-41.12%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-96.25%	-48.38%	-47.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-95.70%	-39.99%	-55.71%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-57.23%	-42.56%	-14.67%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	75.29%	29.86%	+45.43%

Volatility

GLNK vs. BITS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Grayscale Chainlink Trust ETF (GLNK) is 12.05%, while Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF (BITS) has a volatility of 15.14%. This indicates that GLNK experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BITS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GLNK	BITS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.05%	15.14%	-3.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	45.60%	40.67%	+4.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	99.63%	54.18%	+45.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	161.90%	60.61%	+101.29%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	161.90%	60.61%	+101.29%

GLNK vs. BITS - Expense Ratio Comparison

GLNK has a 2.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BITS's 0.65% expense ratio.

Dividends

GLNK vs. BITS - Dividend Comparison

GLNK has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BITS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 24.96%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BITS Global X Blockchain & Bitcoin Strategy ETF	24.96%	22.80%	29.49%	13.69%	0.48%	1.90%
GLNK Grayscale Chainlink Trust ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GLNK and BITS in my portfolio?

GLNK and BITS have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GLNK or BITS?

BITS has higher volatility (15.14%) compared to GLNK (12.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GLNK dropped -96.25% vs BITS's -83.11%.

Which ETF is better, GLNK or BITS?

On 3-year performance, BITS leads with 35.02% vs -18.59% for GLNK. On fees, BITS is cheaper at 0.65% per year. On volatility, GLNK has been the lower-risk option at 12.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GLNK or BITS?

Over the 3-year period, BITS has performed better with a 35.02% return vs -18.59%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GLNK or BITS?

BITS is cheaper with a 0.65% expense ratio, compared with 2.50% for GLNK.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GLNK or BITS?

BITS has the higher dividend yield at 24.96%, compared with 0.00% for GLNK.

What is the main difference between GLNK and BITS?

GLNK tracks Chainlink (LINK), while BITS tracks NONE. They also come from different issuers: Grayscale and Global X. Their fees differ too: 2.50% for GLNK and 0.65% for BITS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BITS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.12 vs -0.74), 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.