QBF vs. BSCQ

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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 -37.30% vs 4.21% for BSCQ. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. QBF charges 0.79%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for BSCQ.

Performance

QBF vs. BSCQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) and Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QBF achieves a -27.01% return, which is significantly lower than BSCQ's 1.68% return.

QBF

• 1D: -3.18%
• 1M: -14.78%
• YTD: -27.01%
• 6M: -27.39%
• 1Y: -37.30%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BSCQ

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.25%
• YTD: 1.68%
• 6M: 1.78%
• 1Y: 4.21%
• 3Y*: 5.17%
• 5Y*: 1.51%
• 10Y*: —

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

QBF vs. BSCQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
QBF Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly	-27.01%	-14.76%
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF	1.68%	4.39%

Correlation

The correlation between QBF and BSCQ is -0.04, 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	-0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 6, 2025	-0.02

Return for Risk

QBF vs. BSCQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

QBF

QBF Risk / Return Rank: 1
QBF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 0
QBF Sortino Ratio Rank: 0
QBF Omega Ratio Rank: 1
QBF Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
QBF Martin Ratio Rank: 1

BSCQ

BSCQ Risk / Return Rank: 99
BSCQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 99
BSCQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
BSCQ Omega Ratio Rank: 99
BSCQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
BSCQ Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

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.

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.

	QBF	BSCQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.38	6.97	-8.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-2.08	15.43	-17.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.78	3.40	-2.63
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.81	41.36	-42.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.43	181.24	-182.66

QBF vs. BSCQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QBF Sharpe Ratio is -1.38, which is lower than the BSCQ Sharpe Ratio of 6.97. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QBF and BSCQ, 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

QBF vs. BSCQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QBF drawdown since its inception was -46.35%, 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.

Drawdown Indicators

	QBF	BSCQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-46.35%	-16.50%	-29.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-46.35%	-0.10%	-46.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-1.13%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-13.02%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-45.44%	-0.03%	-45.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.82%	-2.83%	-14.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	26.21%	0.02%	+26.19%

Volatility

QBF vs. BSCQ - Volatility Comparison

Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) has a higher volatility of 10.57% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ) at 0.12%. 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.

Volatility by Period

	QBF	BSCQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.57%	0.12%	+10.45%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.27%	0.42%	+19.85%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.20%	0.61%	+26.59%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	29.01%	3.29%	+25.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	29.01%	4.75%	+24.26%

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 1.89%, less than BSCQ's 4.11% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF	4.11%	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	1.89%	1.38%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QBF and BSCQ in my portfolio?

QBF and BSCQ have a correlation of -0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QBF or BSCQ?

QBF has higher volatility (10.57%) compared to BSCQ (0.12%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QBF dropped -46.35% vs BSCQ's -16.50%.

Which ETF is better, QBF or BSCQ?

On 1-year performance, BSCQ leads with 4.21% vs -37.30% for QBF. On fees, BSCQ is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BSCQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.12%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QBF or BSCQ?

Over the 1-year period, BSCQ has performed better with a 4.21% return vs -37.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QBF or BSCQ?

BSCQ is cheaper with a 0.10% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for QBF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QBF or BSCQ?

BSCQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.11%, compared with 1.89% for QBF.

What is the main difference between QBF and BSCQ?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BSCQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.97 vs -1.38), 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.