PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
SCUS vs. BFAP
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

SCUS vs. BFAP - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF (SCUS) and FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCUS achieves a 1.49% return, which is significantly higher than BFAP's -21.08% return.


SCUS

1D
-0.06%
1M
0.18%
YTD
1.49%
6M
1.61%
1Y
3.94%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BFAP

1D
1.06%
1M
-5.80%
YTD
-21.08%
6M
-21.68%
1Y
-24.54%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

SCUS vs. BFAP - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between SCUS and BFAP is -0.09, 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

-0.09

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025

-0.09

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

SCUS vs. BFAP — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCUS
SCUS Risk / Return Rank: 9999
Overall Rank
SCUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 9999
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCUS Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
SCUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCUS Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank

BFAP
BFAP Risk / Return Rank: 22
Overall Rank
BFAP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 11
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BFAP Sortino Ratio Rank: 11
Sortino Ratio Rank
BFAP Omega Ratio Rank: 11
Omega Ratio Rank
BFAP Calmar Ratio Rank: 33
Calmar Ratio Rank
BFAP Martin Ratio Rank: 22
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.

SCUS vs. BFAP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF (SCUS) and FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP). 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.


SCUSBFAPDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+6.99

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+12.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.56

0.81

+1.75

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

23.76

-0.74

+24.49

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

102.91

-1.34

+104.26

SCUS vs. BFAP - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCUS Sharpe Ratio is 5.84, which is higher than the BFAP Sharpe Ratio of -1.15. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCUS and BFAP, 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...

Drawdowns

SCUS vs. BFAP - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCUS drawdown since its inception was -0.17%, smaller than the maximum BFAP drawdown of -33.31%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCUS and BFAP.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


SCUSBFAPDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.17%

-33.31%

+33.14%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.17%

-33.31%

+33.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.08%

-31.41%

+31.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.02%

-11.57%

+11.55%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.04%

18.27%

-18.23%

Volatility

SCUS vs. BFAP - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF (SCUS) is 0.22%, while FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April (BFAP) has a volatility of 5.12%. This indicates that SCUS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BFAP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


SCUSBFAPDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.22%

5.12%

-4.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.50%

16.89%

-16.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.68%

21.43%

-20.75%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

0.71%

20.47%

-19.76%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

0.71%

20.47%

-19.76%

SCUS vs. BFAP - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCUS has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is lower than BFAP's 0.90% expense ratio.


Dividends

SCUS vs. BFAP - Dividend Comparison

SCUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.91%, less than BFAP's 24.04% yield.


PositionTTM20252024
BFAP
FT Vest Bitcoin Strategy Floor15 ETF - April
24.04%18.97%0.00%
SCUS
Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF
3.91%4.17%1.62%

Frequently Asked Questions


SCUS and BFAP have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BFAP has higher volatility (5.12%) compared to SCUS (0.22%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCUS dropped -0.17% vs BFAP's -33.31%.

On 1-year performance, SCUS leads with 3.94% vs -24.54% for BFAP. On fees, SCUS is cheaper at 0.14% per year. On volatility, SCUS has been the lower-risk option at 0.22%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, SCUS has performed better with a 3.94% return vs -24.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCUS is cheaper with a 0.14% expense ratio, compared with 0.90% for BFAP.

BFAP has the higher dividend yield at 24.04%, compared with 3.91% for SCUS.

SCUS is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while BFAP is Cryptocurrency. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and First Trust. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for SCUS and 0.90% for BFAP.

SCUS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.84 vs -1.15), 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 SCUS and BFAP

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