PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RWEM vs. BCI
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RWEM vs. BCI - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) and abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with RWEM having a 26.61% return and BCI slightly higher at 26.68%.


RWEM

1D
1.08%
1M
12.70%
YTD
26.61%
6M
37.26%
1Y
56.82%
3Y*
25.41%
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)

RWEM vs. BCI - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
RWEM
Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF
26.61%28.17%7.24%21.56%-20.11%0.42%
BCI
abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF
26.68%15.07%5.47%-8.79%15.09%2.34%

Correlation

The correlation between RWEM and BCI is -0.06, 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

-0.06

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.13

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 17, 2021

0.21

The correlation between RWEM and BCI shifts across timeframes, from -0.06 (1 year) to 0.21 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RWEM vs. BCI - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RWEM
BCI

Technology

36.8%

-

Financial Services

23.6%
100.0%

Basic Materials

7.9%

-

Industrials

6.5%

-

Consumer Cyclical

6.3%

-

Communication Services

4.5%

-

Consumer Defensive

4.5%

-

Energy

4.3%

-

Utilities

2.5%

-

Real Estate

1.8%

-

Healthcare

1.4%

-

Technology

RWEM
36.8%
BCI

-

Financial Services

RWEM
23.6%
BCI
100.0%

Basic Materials

RWEM
7.9%
BCI

-

Industrials

RWEM
6.5%
BCI

-

Consumer Cyclical

RWEM
6.3%
BCI

-

Communication Services

RWEM
4.5%
BCI

-

Consumer Defensive

RWEM
4.5%
BCI

-

Energy

RWEM
4.3%
BCI

-

Utilities

RWEM
2.5%
BCI

-

Real Estate

RWEM
1.8%
BCI

-

Healthcare

RWEM
1.4%
BCI

-

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

RWEM vs. BCI — Risk / Return Rank

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

RWEM
RWEM Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
RWEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5454
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RWEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
RWEM Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
RWEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
RWEM Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
Martin Ratio Rank

BCI
BCI Risk / Return Rank: 7171
Overall Rank
BCI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6868
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BCI Sortino Ratio Rank: 6161
Sortino Ratio Rank
BCI Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
BCI Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
BCI Martin Ratio Rank: 7070
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RWEM vs. BCI - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) 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.


RWEMBCIDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.50

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.49

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.41

-0.07

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.71

5.10

-1.39

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.99

13.14

-1.15

RWEM vs. BCI - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RWEM Sharpe Ratio is 1.79, which is comparable to the BCI Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RWEM 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RWEMBCIDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.79

2.30

-0.50

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.66

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.59

0.48

+0.11

Drawdowns

RWEM vs. BCI - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RWEM drawdown since its inception was -26.92%, smaller than the maximum BCI drawdown of -32.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RWEM and BCI.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RWEMBCIDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-26.92%

-32.69%

+5.77%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-15.39%

-7.61%

-7.78%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.56%

-11.38%

-11.18%

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

-9.64%

-12.00%

+2.36%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

4.75%

2.95%

+1.80%

Volatility

RWEM vs. BCI - Volatility Comparison

Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF (RWEM) has a higher volatility of 8.57% compared to abrdn Bloomberg All Commodity Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCI) at 5.16%. This indicates that RWEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BCI based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RWEMBCIDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

8.57%

5.16%

+3.41%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

29.47%

14.80%

+14.67%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

31.82%

16.92%

+14.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

21.36%

16.82%

+4.54%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

21.36%

15.65%

+5.71%

RWEM vs. BCI - Expense Ratio Comparison

RWEM has a 0.52% expense ratio, which is higher than BCI's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

RWEM vs. BCI - Dividend Comparison

RWEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.70%, less than BCI's 13.01% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023202220212020201920182017
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%
RWEM
Rayliant Wilshire NxtGen Emerging Markets Equity ETF
1.70%2.15%3.59%1.60%5.59%0.39%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RWEM and BCI have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RWEM has higher volatility (8.57%) compared to BCI (5.16%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RWEM dropped -26.92% vs BCI's -32.69%.

On 3-year performance, RWEM leads with 25.41% vs 15.96% for BCI. On fees, BCI is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, BCI has been the lower-risk option at 5.16%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, RWEM has performed better with a 25.41% return vs 15.96%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BCI is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.52% for RWEM.

BCI has the higher dividend yield at 13.01%, compared with 1.70% for RWEM.

RWEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while BCI is Commodities. They also come from different issuers: Rayliant and Aberdeen. Their fees differ too: 0.52% for RWEM and 0.25% for BCI.

BCI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 1.79), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RWEM and BCI

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