RNWZ vs. BSCQ
RNWZ (TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF) and BSCQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RNWZ is a Energy Equities fund actively managed by TrueShares, while BSCQ is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the NASDAQ BulletShares USD Corporate Bond 2026 Index. RNWZ is actively managed, while BSCQ is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, RNWZ returned 11.78%/yr vs 5.17%/yr for BSCQ. At a 0.25 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. RNWZ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for BSCQ.
Performance
RNWZ vs. BSCQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RNWZ achieves a 14.05% return, which is significantly higher than BSCQ's 1.68% return.
RNWZ
- 1D
- 1.10%
- 1M
- -2.56%
- YTD
- 14.05%
- 6M
- 15.05%
- 1Y
- 33.86%
- 3Y*
- 11.78%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BSCQ
- 1D
- -0.03%
- 1M
- 0.25%
- YTD
- 1.68%
- 6M
- 1.81%
- 1Y
- 4.25%
- 3Y*
- 5.17%
- 5Y*
- 1.53%
- 10Y*
- —
RNWZ vs. BSCQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RNWZ TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF | 14.05% | 36.33% | -7.36% | -3.89% | -0.74% |
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF | 1.68% | 5.02% | 4.86% | 5.71% | -0.43% |
Correlation
The correlation between RNWZ and BSCQ is -0.03, 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 | -0.03 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.26 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 9, 2022 | 0.25 |
The correlation between RNWZ and BSCQ shifts across timeframes, from -0.03 (1 year) to 0.26 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
RNWZ vs. BSCQ — Risk / Return Rank
RNWZ
BSCQ
RNWZ vs. BSCQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ) 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.
| RNWZ | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -4.81 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -12.56 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.39 | 3.43 | -2.04 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 4.62 | 41.77 | -37.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 12.19 | 181.80 | -169.61 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RNWZ vs. BSCQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RNWZ drawdown since its inception was -24.90%, which is greater than BSCQ's maximum drawdown of -16.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RNWZ and BSCQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RNWZ | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -24.90% | -16.50% | -8.40% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.36% | -0.10% | -7.26% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -24.74% | -1.13% | -23.61% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -13.02% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -6.30% | -0.03% | -6.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.16% | -2.84% | -4.32% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.79% | 0.02% | +2.77% |
Volatility
RNWZ vs. BSCQ - Volatility Comparison
TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF (RNWZ) has a higher volatility of 4.31% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ) at 0.13%. This indicates that RNWZ'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
| RNWZ | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.31% | 0.13% | +4.18% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 12.21% | 0.43% | +11.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.32% | 0.61% | +14.71% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.96% | 3.29% | +13.67% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 16.96% | 4.75% | +12.21% |
RNWZ vs. BSCQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
RNWZ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than BSCQ's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
RNWZ vs. BSCQ - Dividend Comparison
RNWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.96%, less than BSCQ's 4.46% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF | 4.46% | 4.14% | 4.05% | 3.53% | 2.54% | 1.91% | 2.42% | 2.96% | 3.32% | 2.92% | 0.51% |
RNWZ TrueShares Eagle Global Renewable Energy Income ETF | 1.96% | 2.12% | 2.36% | 3.87% | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
RNWZ and BSCQ have a correlation of -0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RNWZ has higher volatility (4.31%) compared to BSCQ (0.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RNWZ dropped -24.90% vs BSCQ's -16.50%.
On 3-year performance, RNWZ leads with 11.78% vs 5.17% for BSCQ. On fees, BSCQ is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BSCQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 3-year period, RNWZ has performed better with a 11.78% return vs 5.17%. 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 0.75% for RNWZ.
BSCQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.46%, compared with 1.96% for RNWZ.
RNWZ is categorized as Energy Equities, while BSCQ is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for RNWZ and 0.10% for BSCQ.
BSCQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.04 vs 2.22), 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 RNWZ 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