MNA vs. BDCX
MNA (IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF) and BDCX (ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5X Leveraged MVIS BDC Index ETN) are both exchange-traded funds - MNA is a Hedge Fund fund tracking the IQ Merger Arbitrage Index, while BDCX is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Business Development Companies (150%). Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MNA returned 1.83%/yr vs 1.22%/yr for BDCX. At a 0.31 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MNA charges 0.77%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BDCX.
Performance
MNA vs. BDCX - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MNA achieves a 1.79% return, which is significantly higher than BDCX's -11.90% return.
MNA
- 1D
- -0.08%
- 1M
- -0.14%
- YTD
- 1.79%
- 6M
- 1.97%
- 1Y
- 4.47%
- 3Y*
- 5.95%
- 5Y*
- 1.83%
- 10Y*
- 2.74%
BDCX
- 1D
- -0.44%
- 1M
- -5.50%
- YTD
- -11.90%
- 6M
- -14.62%
- 1Y
- -18.01%
- 3Y*
- 2.98%
- 5Y*
- 1.22%
- 10Y*
- —
MNA vs. BDCX - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF | 1.79% | 8.59% | 4.93% | 0.18% | -1.61% | -3.24% | 9.02% |
BDCX ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5X Leveraged MVIS BDC Index ETN | -11.90% | -10.42% | 15.32% | 35.33% | -17.67% | 52.70% | 24.50% |
Correlation
The correlation between MNA and BDCX is 0.28, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.28 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.34 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2020 | 0.31 |
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
MNA vs. BDCX — Risk / Return Rank
MNA
BDCX
MNA vs. BDCX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) and ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5X Leveraged MVIS BDC Index ETN (BDCX). 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.
| MNA | BDCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.60 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.24 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.17 | 0.91 | +0.26 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.22 | -0.59 | +3.81 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 7.99 | -1.04 | +9.03 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MNA | BDCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.95 | -0.66 | +1.60 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.37 | 0.05 | +0.32 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.42 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.36 | 0.43 | -0.07 |
Drawdowns
MNA vs. BDCX - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MNA drawdown since its inception was -16.68%, smaller than the maximum BDCX drawdown of -34.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MNA and BDCX.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MNA | BDCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -16.68% | -34.96% | +18.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -1.40% | -30.46% | +29.06% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -3.01% | -33.39% | +30.38% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -10.45% | -34.96% | +24.51% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -16.68% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.55% | -28.40% | +27.85% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -2.83% | -10.10% | +7.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.56% | 17.35% | -16.79% |
Volatility
MNA vs. BDCX - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF (MNA) is 1.66%, while ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5X Leveraged MVIS BDC Index ETN (BDCX) has a volatility of 8.65%. This indicates that MNA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BDCX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MNA | BDCX | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.66% | 8.65% | -6.99% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.59% | 22.81% | -19.22% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.75% | 27.60% | -22.85% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 4.98% | 26.59% | -21.61% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 6.55% | 26.94% | -20.39% |
MNA vs. BDCX - Expense Ratio Comparison
MNA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than BDCX's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
MNA vs. BDCX - Dividend Comparison
MNA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BDCX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 20.31%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BDCX ETRACS Quarterly Pay 1.5X Leveraged MVIS BDC Index ETN | 20.31% | 19.17% | 15.28% | 14.71% | 17.47% | 11.52% | 6.32% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
MNA IQ Merger Arbitrage ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.20% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 2.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.21% | 0.87% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MNA and BDCX have a correlation of 0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BDCX has higher volatility (8.65%) compared to MNA (1.66%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MNA dropped -16.68% vs BDCX's -34.96%.
On 5-year performance, MNA leads with 1.83% vs 1.22% for BDCX. On fees, MNA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, MNA has been the lower-risk option at 1.66%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, MNA has performed better with a 1.83% return vs 1.22%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
MNA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BDCX.
BDCX has the higher dividend yield at 20.31%, compared with 0.00% for MNA.
MNA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while BDCX is Leveraged Equities. MNA tracks IQ Merger Arbitrage Index, while BDCX tracks MVIS US Business Development Companies (150%). They also come from different issuers: New York Life and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for MNA and 0.95% for BDCX.
MNA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.95 vs -0.66), 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.
Find the right allocation for MNA and BDCX
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