GNR vs. BCI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

GNR (SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF) and BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GNR is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Natural Resources Index, while BCI is a Commodities fund actively managed by Aberdeen. GNR is passively managed, while BCI is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, GNR returned 9.73%/yr vs 11.07%/yr for BCI. A 0.56 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GNR charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for BCI.

Performance

GNR vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) 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, GNR achieves a 20.27% return, which is significantly lower than BCI's 26.68% return.

GNR

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: 1.20%
• YTD: 20.27%
• 6M: 23.12%
• 1Y: 43.10%
• 3Y*: 15.55%
• 5Y*: 9.73%
• 10Y*: 10.91%

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)

GNR vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	20.27%	28.68%	-8.27%	2.95%	10.20%	24.73%	-0.03%	16.49%	-13.19%	18.52%
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	26.68%	15.07%	5.47%	-8.79%	15.09%	26.18%	-2.77%	7.06%	-11.21%	2.94%

Correlation

The correlation between GNR and BCI is 0.46, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.46
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.54
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.58
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 3, 2017	0.56

The correlation between GNR and BCI shifts across timeframes, from 0.46 (1 year) to 0.58 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

GNR vs. BCI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GNR	BCI
Basic Materials	50.3%	-
Energy	37.6%	-
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.6%	-
Real Estate	0.8%	-
Industrials	0.2%	-
Financial Services	0.0%	100.0%
Healthcare	0.0%	-
Utilities	0.0%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Technology	-	-

Return for Risk

GNR vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

GNR

GNR Risk / Return Rank: 82
GNR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
GNR Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
GNR Omega Ratio Rank: 76
GNR Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
GNR Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

GNR vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) 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.

	GNR	BCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.64	2.30	+0.35
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.38	2.92	+0.47
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.46	1.41	+0.05
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	5.43	5.10	+0.33
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	21.28	13.14	+8.14
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

GNR vs. BCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GNR Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is comparable to the BCI Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GNR 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

	GNR	BCI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.64	2.30	+0.35
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48	0.66	-0.18
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.50	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.26	0.48	-0.22

Drawdowns

GNR vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GNR drawdown since its inception was -51.37%, which is greater than BCI's maximum drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GNR and BCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	GNR	BCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-51.37%	-32.69%	-18.68%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.97%	-7.61%	-0.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.15%	-11.38%	-9.77%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.66%	-26.50%	+0.84%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-48.59%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.51%	-4.52%	+3.01%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.95%	-12.00%	-2.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.03%	2.95%	-0.92%

Volatility

GNR vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF (GNR) is 4.53%, while abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a volatility of 5.16%. This indicates that GNR 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

	GNR	BCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.53%	5.16%	-0.63%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.23%	14.80%	-1.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.39%	16.92%	-0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.23%	16.82%	+3.41%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.88%	15.65%	+6.23%

GNR vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

GNR has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than BCI's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

GNR vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

GNR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, less than BCI's 13.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%
GNR SPDR S&P Global Natural Resources ETF	2.47%	2.76%	4.73%	3.37%	4.37%	3.44%	2.78%	3.84%	3.51%	2.40%	2.06%	4.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GNR and BCI in my portfolio?

GNR and BCI have a correlation of 0.46, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GNR or BCI?

BCI has higher volatility (5.16%) compared to GNR (4.53%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GNR dropped -51.37% vs BCI's -32.69%.

Which ETF is better, GNR or BCI?

On 5-year performance, BCI leads with 11.07% vs 9.73% for GNR. On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, GNR has been the lower-risk option at 4.53%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GNR or BCI?

Over the 5-year period, BCI has performed better with a 11.07% return vs 9.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GNR or BCI?

BCI is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for GNR.

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

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 2.47% for GNR.

What is the main difference between GNR and BCI?

GNR is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while BCI is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for GNR and 0.25% for BCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GNR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 vs 2.30), 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.