NCIQ vs. IBLC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

NCIQ (Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF) and IBLC (iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds - NCIQ tracks the Nasdaq Crypto US Settlement Price™ Index while IBLC tracks the ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, NCIQ returned -40.00% vs 73.27% for IBLC. A 0.72 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. NCIQ charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IBLC.

Performance

NCIQ vs. IBLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF (NCIQ) and iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, NCIQ achieves a -28.25% return, which is significantly lower than IBLC's 32.34% return.

NCIQ

• 1D: -2.92%
• 1M: -18.28%
• YTD: -28.25%
• 6M: -33.10%
• 1Y: -40.00%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBLC

• 1D: -3.00%
• 1M: 13.52%
• YTD: 32.34%
• 6M: 15.25%
• 1Y: 73.27%
• 3Y*: 48.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

NCIQ vs. IBLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
NCIQ Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF	-28.25%	-10.21%
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF	32.34%	19.99%

Correlation

The correlation between NCIQ and IBLC is 0.72, 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	0.72
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 18, 2025	0.72

The correlation between NCIQ and IBLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.72 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

NCIQ vs. IBLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

NCIQ

NCIQ Risk / Return Rank: 3
NCIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
NCIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
NCIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 3
NCIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 3
NCIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 3

IBLC

IBLC Risk / Return Rank: 33
IBLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
IBLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
IBLC Omega Ratio Rank: 33
IBLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
IBLC Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

NCIQ vs. IBLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF (NCIQ) and iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC). 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.

	NCIQ	IBLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.85	1.34	-2.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.15	1.92	-3.07
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.87	1.23	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.76	1.64	-2.40
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.29	3.26	-4.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

NCIQ vs. IBLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current NCIQ Sharpe Ratio is -0.85, which is lower than the IBLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of NCIQ and IBLC, 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

	NCIQ	IBLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.85	1.34	-2.20
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.61	0.40	-1.00

Drawdowns

NCIQ vs. IBLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum NCIQ drawdown since its inception was -52.90%, smaller than the maximum IBLC drawdown of -62.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for NCIQ and IBLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	NCIQ	IBLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.90%	-62.54%	+9.64%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-52.90%	-44.94%	-7.96%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-51.68%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-52.01%	-12.99%	-39.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-21.86%	-25.89%	+4.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	30.94%	22.56%	+8.38%

Volatility

NCIQ vs. IBLC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF (NCIQ) is 9.56%, while iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) has a volatility of 14.67%. This indicates that NCIQ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	NCIQ	IBLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	9.56%	14.67%	-5.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.46%	40.76%	-4.30%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	47.21%	54.94%	-7.73%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.80%	64.49%	-16.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	47.80%	64.49%	-16.69%

NCIQ vs. IBLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

NCIQ has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than IBLC's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

NCIQ vs. IBLC - Dividend Comparison

NCIQ has not paid dividends to shareholders, while IBLC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.77%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF	4.77%	6.31%	1.60%	1.79%	0.84%
NCIQ Hashdex Nasdaq Crypto Index US ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both NCIQ and IBLC in my portfolio?

NCIQ and IBLC have a correlation of 0.72, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, NCIQ or IBLC?

IBLC has higher volatility (14.67%) compared to NCIQ (9.56%). In terms of maximum drawdown, NCIQ dropped -52.90% vs IBLC's -62.54%.

Which ETF is better, NCIQ or IBLC?

On 1-year performance, IBLC leads with 73.27% vs -40.00% for NCIQ. On fees, NCIQ is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, NCIQ has been the lower-risk option at 9.56%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, NCIQ or IBLC?

Over the 1-year period, IBLC has performed better with a 73.27% return vs -40.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, NCIQ or IBLC?

NCIQ is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for IBLC.

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

IBLC has the higher dividend yield at 4.77%, compared with 0.00% for NCIQ.

What is the main difference between NCIQ and IBLC?

NCIQ tracks Nasdaq Crypto US Settlement Price™ Index, while IBLC tracks ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index. They also come from different issuers: Hashdex and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for NCIQ and 0.47% for IBLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 vs -0.85), 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.