QBF vs. BSCQ
QBF (Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly) and BSCQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QBF is a Blockchain fund actively managed by Innovator, while BSCQ is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the NASDAQ BulletShares USD Corporate Bond 2026 Index. QBF is actively managed, while BSCQ is passively managed. Over the past year, QBF returned -35.86% vs 4.41% for BSCQ. At a correlation of -0.03, they often move in opposite directions. QBF charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for BSCQ.
Performance
QBF vs. BSCQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, QBF achieves a -23.63% return, which is significantly lower than BSCQ's 1.55% return.
QBF
- 1D
- -2.17%
- 1M
- -14.35%
- YTD
- -23.63%
- 6M
- -27.96%
- 1Y
- -35.86%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BSCQ
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.34%
- YTD
- 1.55%
- 6M
- 1.92%
- 1Y
- 4.41%
- 3Y*
- 5.06%
- 5Y*
- 1.47%
- 10Y*
- —
QBF vs. BSCQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
QBF Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly | -23.63% | -14.22% |
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF | 1.55% | 4.39% |
Correlation
The correlation between QBF and BSCQ is -0.05, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.05 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 7, 2025 | -0.03 |
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
QBF vs. BSCQ — Risk / Return Rank
QBF
BSCQ
QBF vs. BSCQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) and Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ). 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.
| QBF | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -8.42 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -17.26 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.78 | 3.45 | -2.67 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.84 | 43.24 | -44.07 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.48 | 179.65 | -181.13 |
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
| QBF | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -1.37 | 7.06 | -8.42 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.45 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.97 | 0.60 | -1.57 |
Drawdowns
QBF vs. BSCQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum QBF drawdown since its inception was -42.92%, which is greater than BSCQ's maximum drawdown of -16.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QBF and BSCQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| QBF | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -42.92% | -16.50% | -26.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -42.92% | -0.10% | -42.82% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.13% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -13.02% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -42.92% | 0.00% | -42.92% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -16.82% | -2.85% | -13.97% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 24.20% | 0.02% | +24.18% |
Volatility
QBF vs. BSCQ - Volatility Comparison
Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) has a higher volatility of 7.09% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ) at 0.17%. This indicates that QBF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BSCQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| QBF | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 7.09% | 0.17% | +6.92% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.56% | 0.43% | +18.13% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 26.36% | 0.63% | +25.73% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.53% | 3.30% | +25.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.53% | 4.77% | +23.76% |
QBF vs. BSCQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
QBF has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than BSCQ's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
QBF vs. BSCQ - Dividend Comparison
QBF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.81%, less than BSCQ's 4.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF | 4.12% | 4.14% | 4.05% | 3.53% | 2.54% | 1.91% | 2.42% | 2.96% | 3.32% | 2.92% | 0.51% |
QBF Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly | 1.81% | 1.38% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
QBF and BSCQ have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
QBF has higher volatility (7.09%) compared to BSCQ (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBF dropped -42.92% vs BSCQ's -16.50%.
On 1-year performance, BSCQ leads with 4.41% vs -35.86% for QBF. On fees, BSCQ is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BSCQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BSCQ has performed better with a 4.41% return vs -35.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BSCQ is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBF.
BSCQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 1.81% for QBF.
QBF is categorized as Blockchain, while BSCQ is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Innovator and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for QBF and 0.10% for BSCQ.
BSCQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.06 vs -1.37), 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 QBF and BSCQ
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