QVMM vs. BCI

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QVMM (Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF) and BCI (abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QVMM is a Multi-factor fund tracking the S&P MidCap 400 Quality, Value & Momentum Top 90% Multi-Factor Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while BCI is a Commodities fund actively managed by Aberdeen. QVMM is passively managed, while BCI is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, QVMM returned 16.65%/yr vs 15.96%/yr for BCI. At a 0.22 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. QVMM charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for BCI.

Performance

QVMM vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMM) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QVMM achieves a 14.47% return, which is significantly lower than BCI's 26.68% return.

QVMM

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 3.49%
• YTD: 14.47%
• 6M: 14.87%
• 1Y: 26.39%
• 3Y*: 16.65%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BCI

• 1D: -0.12%
• 1M: -3.06%
• YTD: 26.68%
• 6M: 25.55%
• 1Y: 38.68%
• 3Y*: 15.96%
• 5Y*: 11.07%
• 10Y*: —

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

QVMM vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
QVMM Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF	14.47%	8.82%	13.36%	15.43%	-13.06%	6.04%
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	26.68%	15.07%	5.47%	-8.79%	15.09%	4.79%

Correlation

The correlation between QVMM and BCI is -0.07, 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	-0.07
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 1, 2021	0.22

The correlation between QVMM and BCI shifts across timeframes, from -0.07 (1 year) to 0.22 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QVMM vs. BCI - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QVMM	BCI
Industrials	26.5%	-
Financial Services	15.2%	100.0%
Technology	13.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	10.0%	-
Healthcare	8.7%	-
Real Estate	7.6%	-
Energy	5.5%	-
Basic Materials	4.7%	-
Consumer Defensive	4.0%	-
Utilities	3.3%	-
Communication Services	0.9%	-

Return for Risk

QVMM vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

QVMM

QVMM Risk / Return Rank: 56
QVMM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
QVMM Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
QVMM Omega Ratio Rank: 49
QVMM Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
QVMM Martin Ratio Rank: 64

BCI

BCI Risk / Return Rank: 71
BCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 68
BCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
BCI Omega Ratio Rank: 67
BCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 87
BCI Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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.

QVMM vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMM) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). 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.

	QVMM	BCI	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	2.30	-0.56
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.54	2.92	-0.37
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	1.41	-0.11
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.19	5.10	-1.91
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	11.48	13.14	-1.66
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QVMM vs. BCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QVMM Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is comparable to the BCI Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QVMM and BCI, 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

	QVMM	BCI	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.74	2.30	-0.56
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.66	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.44	0.48	-0.03

Drawdowns

QVMM vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QVMM drawdown since its inception was -24.00%, smaller than the maximum BCI drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QVMM and BCI.

Drawdown Indicators

	QVMM	BCI	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.00%	-32.69%	+8.69%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.30%	-7.61%	-0.69%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-24.00%	-11.38%	-12.62%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.50%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-4.52%	+4.52%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.09%	-12.00%	+4.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.30%	2.95%	-0.65%

Volatility

QVMM vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF (QVMM) is 4.63%, while abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) has a volatility of 5.16%. This indicates that QVMM experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QVMM	BCI	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.63%	5.16%	-0.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.21%	14.80%	-3.59%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.28%	16.92%	-1.64%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.48%	16.82%	+2.66%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.48%	15.65%	+3.83%

QVMM vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

QVMM has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is lower than BCI's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

QVMM vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

QVMM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.16%, less than BCI's 13.01% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BCI abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF	13.01%	16.49%	3.29%	3.93%	19.98%	19.43%	0.68%	1.47%	1.13%	5.02%
QVMM Invesco S&P MidCap 400 QVM Multi-factor ETF	1.16%	1.32%	1.29%	1.42%	1.51%	0.60%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QVMM and BCI in my portfolio?

QVMM and BCI have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QVMM or BCI?

BCI has higher volatility (5.16%) compared to QVMM (4.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QVMM dropped -24.00% vs BCI's -32.69%.

Which ETF is better, QVMM or BCI?

On 3-year performance, QVMM leads with 16.65% vs 15.96% for BCI. On fees, QVMM is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, QVMM has been the lower-risk option at 4.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QVMM or BCI?

Over the 3-year period, QVMM has performed better with a 16.65% return vs 15.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QVMM or BCI?

QVMM is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for BCI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QVMM or BCI?

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 1.16% for QVMM.

What is the main difference between QVMM and BCI?

QVMM is categorized as Multi-factor, while BCI is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for QVMM and 0.25% for BCI.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.74), 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.