IBLC vs. EZET

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

IBLC (iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF) and EZET (Franklin Ethereum ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds - IBLC tracks the ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index while EZET tracks the CME CF Ether-Dollar Reference Rate - New York Variant. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, IBLC returned 63.95% vs -28.46% for EZET. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. IBLC charges 0.47%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for EZET.

Performance

IBLC vs. EZET - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) and Franklin Ethereum ETF (EZET). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IBLC achieves a 27.22% return, which is significantly higher than EZET's -44.18% return.

IBLC

• 1D: -2.19%
• 1M: -0.02%
• YTD: 27.22%
• 6M: 19.07%
• 1Y: 63.95%
• 3Y*: 45.22%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EZET

• 1D: -4.27%
• 1M: -19.67%
• YTD: -44.18%
• 6M: -44.13%
• 1Y: -28.46%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

IBLC vs. EZET - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF	27.22%	27.05%	-7.21%
EZET Franklin Ethereum ETF	-44.18%	-11.23%	-4.77%

Correlation

The correlation between IBLC and EZET is 0.67, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 23, 2024	0.69

The correlation between IBLC and EZET has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.67 to 0.69 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

IBLC vs. EZET — Risk / Return Rank

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

IBLC

IBLC Risk / Return Rank: 30
IBLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
IBLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
IBLC Omega Ratio Rank: 32
IBLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 30
IBLC Martin Ratio Rank: 23

EZET

EZET Risk / Return Rank: 6
EZET Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
EZET Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
EZET Omega Ratio Rank: 6
EZET Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
EZET Martin Ratio Rank: 6

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.

IBLC vs. EZET - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) and Franklin Ethereum ETF (EZET). 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.

	IBLC	EZET	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.15	-0.41	+1.56
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.73	-0.20	+1.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	0.98	+0.23
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.43	-0.42	+1.85
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.80	-0.71	+3.51

IBLC vs. EZET - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IBLC Sharpe Ratio is 1.15, which is higher than the EZET Sharpe Ratio of -0.41. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IBLC and EZET, 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

IBLC vs. EZET - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IBLC drawdown since its inception was -62.54%, smaller than the maximum EZET drawdown of -67.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IBLC and EZET.

Drawdown Indicators

	IBLC	EZET	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-62.54%	-67.56%	+5.02%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-44.94%	-67.56%	+22.62%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-51.68%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.36%	-65.79%	+49.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.76%	-33.64%	+7.88%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	22.89%	40.40%	-17.51%

Volatility

IBLC vs. EZET - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) is 16.66%, while Franklin Ethereum ETF (EZET) has a volatility of 19.85%. This indicates that IBLC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EZET based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	IBLC	EZET	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.66%	19.85%	-3.19%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	41.64%	46.99%	-5.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	55.87%	69.14%	-13.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	64.51%	72.49%	-7.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	64.51%	72.49%	-7.98%

IBLC vs. EZET - Expense Ratio Comparison

IBLC has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than EZET's 0.19% expense ratio.

Dividends

IBLC vs. EZET - Dividend Comparison

IBLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.92%, while EZET has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
EZET Franklin Ethereum ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF	4.92%	6.31%	1.60%	1.79%	0.84%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IBLC and EZET in my portfolio?

IBLC and EZET have a correlation of 0.67, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IBLC or EZET?

EZET has higher volatility (19.85%) compared to IBLC (16.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IBLC dropped -62.54% vs EZET's -67.56%.

Which ETF is better, IBLC or EZET?

On 1-year performance, IBLC leads with 63.95% vs -28.46% for EZET. On fees, EZET is cheaper at 0.19% per year. On volatility, IBLC has been the lower-risk option at 16.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IBLC or EZET?

Over the 1-year period, IBLC has performed better with a 63.95% return vs -28.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IBLC or EZET?

EZET is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for IBLC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IBLC or EZET?

IBLC has the higher dividend yield at 4.92%, compared with 0.00% for EZET.

What is the main difference between IBLC and EZET?

IBLC tracks ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index, while EZET tracks CME CF Ether-Dollar Reference Rate - New York Variant. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Franklin Templeton. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for IBLC and 0.19% for EZET.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.15 vs -0.41), 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.