HODL vs. GBTG

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

HODL (VanEck Bitcoin Trust) is Cryptocurrency fund tracking the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate - New York Variant, while GBTG (Global Business Travel Group Inc) is a stock. Over the past year, HODL returned -47.40% vs 46.65% for GBTG. At a 0.20 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

HODL vs. GBTG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Bitcoin Trust (HODL) and Global Business Travel Group Inc (GBTG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, HODL achieves a -28.87% return, which is significantly lower than GBTG's 22.88% return.

HODL

• 1D: -2.71%
• 1M: -2.11%
• 6M: -31.95%
• YTD: -28.87%
• 1Y: -47.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

GBTG

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.43%
• 6M: 15.06%
• YTD: 22.88%
• 1Y: 46.65%
• 3Y*: 9.60%
• 5Y*: -0.73%
• 10Y*: —

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

HODL vs. GBTG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
HODL VanEck Bitcoin Trust	-28.87%	-6.42%	91.50%
GBTG Global Business Travel Group Inc	22.88%	-17.56%	54.41%

Correlation

The correlation between HODL and GBTG is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.18
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.20

Return for Risk

HODL vs. GBTG — Risk / Return Rank

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

HODL

HODL Risk / Return Rank: 1
HODL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
HODL Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
HODL Omega Ratio Rank: 1
HODL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
HODL Martin Ratio Rank: 1

GBTG

GBTG Risk / Return Rank: 74
GBTG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 67
GBTG Sortino Ratio Rank: 82
GBTG Omega Ratio Rank: 83
GBTG Calmar Ratio Rank: 69
GBTG Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

HODL vs. GBTG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Bitcoin Trust (HODL) and Global Business Travel Group Inc (GBTG). 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.

	HODL	GBTG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.08	0.68	-1.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.65	2.14	-3.79
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.82	1.29	-0.47
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.89	1.16	-2.05
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.45	2.72	-4.17

HODL vs. GBTG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current HODL Sharpe Ratio is -1.08, which is lower than the GBTG Sharpe Ratio of 0.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of HODL and GBTG, 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

HODL vs. GBTG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum HODL drawdown since its inception was -53.20%, smaller than the maximum GBTG drawdown of -60.07%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HODL and GBTG.

Drawdown Indicators

	HODL	GBTG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.20%	-60.07%	+6.87%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.20%	-40.41%	-12.79%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-48.01%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-56.00%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-50.44%	-14.70%	-35.74%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.49%	-29.86%	+12.37%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	32.62%	17.20%	+15.42%

Volatility

HODL vs. GBTG - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Bitcoin Trust (HODL) has a higher volatility of 11.45% compared to Global Business Travel Group Inc (GBTG) at 0.77%. This indicates that HODL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than GBTG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	HODL	GBTG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.45%	0.77%	+10.68%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.72%	52.80%	-18.08%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.22%	69.30%	-25.08%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	49.65%	49.44%	+0.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	49.65%	46.81%	+2.84%

Dividends

HODL vs. GBTG - Dividend Comparison

Neither HODL nor GBTG has paid dividends to shareholders.

Tickers have no history of dividend payments

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both HODL and GBTG in my portfolio?

HODL and GBTG have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, HODL or GBTG?

HODL has higher volatility (11.45%) compared to GBTG (0.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HODL dropped -53.20% vs GBTG's -60.07%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

GBTG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.68 vs -1.08), 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.