LULG vs. BCD
LULG (Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF) and BCD (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LULG is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Leverage Shares, while BCD is a Commodities fund actively managed by Aberdeen. Both are actively managed. At a correlation of -0.19, they often move in opposite directions. LULG charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for BCD.
Performance
LULG vs. BCD - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, LULG achieves a -73.00% return, which is significantly lower than BCD's 15.08% return.
LULG
- 1D
- 2.42%
- 1M
- 2.69%
- 6M
- -72.06%
- YTD
- -73.00%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BCD
- 1D
- -0.95%
- 1M
- 0.68%
- 6M
- 10.82%
- YTD
- 15.08%
- 1Y
- 23.43%
- 3Y*
- 11.38%
- 5Y*
- 10.91%
- 10Y*
- —
LULG vs. BCD - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
LULG Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF | -73.00% | 55.59% |
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 15.08% | 3.14% |
Correlation
The correlation between LULG and BCD is -0.19, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 5, 2025 | -0.19 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
LULG vs. BCD — Risk / Return Rank
LULG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
BCD
LULG vs. BCD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF (LULG) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCD). 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.
| LULG | BCD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.30 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 1.85 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 6.23 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LULG vs. BCD - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LULG drawdown since its inception was -79.88%, which is greater than BCD's maximum drawdown of -29.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LULG and BCD.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LULG | BCD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -79.88% | -29.81% | -50.07% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -12.70% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -12.70% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.03% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -74.99% | -7.89% | -67.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -40.32% | -9.84% | -30.48% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 3.77% | — |
Volatility
LULG vs. BCD - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LULG | BCD | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 4.34% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 11.99% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 86.92% | 14.15% | +72.77% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 86.92% | 15.40% | +71.52% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 86.92% | 13.91% | +73.01% |
LULG vs. BCD - Expense Ratio Comparison
LULG has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than BCD's 0.29% expense ratio.
Dividends
LULG vs. BCD - Dividend Comparison
LULG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BCD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 14.96%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BCD abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Longer Dated Strategy K-1 Free ETF | 14.96% | 17.21% | 3.60% | 4.51% | 5.21% | 8.30% | 1.29% | 1.55% | 1.59% | 0.07% |
LULG Leverage Shares 2X Long LULU Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
LULG and BCD have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, BCD is cheaper at 0.29% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BCD is cheaper with a 0.29% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for LULG.
BCD has the higher dividend yield at 14.96%, compared with 0.00% for LULG.
LULG is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BCD is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Leverage Shares and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for LULG and 0.29% for BCD.
Find the right allocation for LULG and BCD
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer