SATO vs. IBLC

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SATO (Invesco Alerian Galaxy Crypto Economy ETF) and IBLC (iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds - SATO tracks the Alerian Galaxy Global Cryptocurrency-Focused Blockchain Equity, Trusts and ETPs Index while IBLC tracks the ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SATO returned 45.60%/yr vs 48.31%/yr for IBLC. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. SATO charges 0.60%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IBLC.

Performance

SATO vs. IBLC - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Alerian Galaxy Crypto Economy ETF (SATO) and iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SATO achieves a 3.47% return, which is significantly lower than IBLC's 32.34% return.

SATO

• 1D: -2.77%
• 1M: 0.47%
• YTD: 3.47%
• 6M: -11.57%
• 1Y: 10.13%
• 3Y*: 45.60%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IBLC

• 1D: -3.00%
• 1M: 13.52%
• YTD: 32.34%
• 6M: 15.25%
• 1Y: 73.27%
• 3Y*: 48.31%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SATO vs. IBLC - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SATO Invesco Alerian Galaxy Crypto Economy ETF	3.47%	2.26%	55.25%	266.77%	-68.57%
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF	32.34%	27.05%	18.58%	201.47%	-57.76%

Correlation

The correlation between SATO and IBLC is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 28, 2022	0.96

The correlation between SATO and IBLC has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

SATO vs. IBLC - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SATO	IBLC
Financial Services	57.1%	66.6%
Technology	32.2%	30.7%
Consumer Cyclical	4.4%	0.1%
Communication Services	3.0%	2.5%
Industrials	1.9%	-
Utilities	1.5%	0.2%
Healthcare	1.2%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

SATO vs. IBLC — Risk / Return Rank

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

SATO

SATO Risk / Return Rank: 12
SATO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
SATO Sortino Ratio Rank: 14
SATO Omega Ratio Rank: 13
SATO Calmar Ratio Rank: 11
SATO Martin Ratio Rank: 10

IBLC

IBLC Risk / Return Rank: 33
IBLC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
IBLC Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
IBLC Omega Ratio Rank: 33
IBLC Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
IBLC Martin Ratio Rank: 24

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.

SATO vs. IBLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Alerian Galaxy Crypto Economy ETF (SATO) and iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC). 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.

	SATO	IBLC	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.20	1.34	-1.15
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	0.65	1.92	-1.27
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.07	1.23	-0.15
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.19	1.64	-1.45
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	0.35	3.26	-2.91
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SATO vs. IBLC - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SATO Sharpe Ratio is 0.20, which is lower than the IBLC Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SATO and IBLC, 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

	SATO	IBLC	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.20	1.34	-1.15
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.00	0.40	-0.40

Drawdowns

SATO vs. IBLC - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SATO drawdown since its inception was -88.00%, which is greater than IBLC's maximum drawdown of -62.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SATO and IBLC.

Drawdown Indicators

	SATO	IBLC	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-88.00%	-62.54%	-25.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.49%	-44.94%	-8.55%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-53.49%	-51.68%	-1.81%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-36.60%	-12.99%	-23.61%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-51.00%	-25.89%	-25.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	29.16%	22.56%	+6.60%

Volatility

SATO vs. IBLC - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco Alerian Galaxy Crypto Economy ETF (SATO) is 11.64%, while iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) has a volatility of 14.67%. This indicates that SATO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IBLC based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SATO	IBLC	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.64%	14.67%	-3.03%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.36%	40.76%	-2.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	51.53%	54.94%	-3.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	63.28%	64.49%	-1.21%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	63.28%	64.49%	-1.21%

SATO vs. IBLC - Expense Ratio Comparison

SATO has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than IBLC's 0.47% expense ratio.

Dividends

SATO vs. IBLC - Dividend Comparison

SATO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.62%, more than IBLC's 4.77% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF	4.77%	6.31%	1.60%	1.79%	0.84%	0.00%
SATO Invesco Alerian Galaxy Crypto Economy ETF	7.62%	9.50%	15.03%	2.21%	8.97%	0.73%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SATO and IBLC in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, SATO and IBLC move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, SATO or IBLC?

IBLC has higher volatility (14.67%) compared to SATO (11.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SATO dropped -88.00% vs IBLC's -62.54%.

Which ETF is better, SATO or IBLC?

On 3-year performance, IBLC leads with 48.31% vs 45.60% for SATO. On fees, IBLC is cheaper at 0.47% per year. On volatility, SATO has been the lower-risk option at 11.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SATO or IBLC?

Over the 3-year period, IBLC has performed better with a 48.31% return vs 45.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SATO or IBLC?

IBLC is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for SATO.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SATO or IBLC?

SATO has the higher dividend yield at 7.62%, compared with 4.77% for IBLC.

What is the main difference between SATO and IBLC?

SATO tracks Alerian Galaxy Global Cryptocurrency-Focused Blockchain Equity, Trusts and ETPs Index, while IBLC tracks ICE FactSet Global Blockchain Technologies Index. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for SATO and 0.47% for IBLC.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IBLC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.34 vs 0.20), 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.