TFNS vs. BDCZ
TFNS (T. Rowe Price Financials ETF) and BDCZ (ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN) are both Financials Equities funds. TFNS is actively managed, while BDCZ is passively managed. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TFNS charges 0.44%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for BDCZ.
Performance
TFNS vs. BDCZ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, TFNS achieves a -5.36% return, which is significantly higher than BDCZ's -7.98% return.
TFNS
- 1D
- -1.39%
- 1M
- -1.27%
- YTD
- -5.36%
- 6M
- -2.12%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BDCZ
- 1D
- -2.73%
- 1M
- -7.44%
- YTD
- -7.98%
- 6M
- -8.99%
- 1Y
- -10.32%
- 3Y*
- 4.75%
- 5Y*
- 3.38%
- 10Y*
- 6.23%
TFNS vs. BDCZ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
TFNS T. Rowe Price Financials ETF | -5.36% | 10.41% |
BDCZ ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN | -7.98% | -3.57% |
Correlation
The correlation between TFNS and BDCZ is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2025 | 0.43 |
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
TFNS vs. BDCZ — Risk / Return Rank
TFNS
BDCZ
TFNS vs. BDCZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for T. Rowe Price Financials ETF (TFNS) and ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN (BDCZ). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| TFNS | BDCZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | -0.51 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.19 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.29 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.31 | 0.27 | +0.04 |
Drawdowns
TFNS vs. BDCZ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum TFNS drawdown since its inception was -14.00%, smaller than the maximum BDCZ drawdown of -55.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TFNS and BDCZ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| TFNS | BDCZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -14.00% | -55.63% | +41.63% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -19.95% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -20.77% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.12% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -55.63% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -8.00% | -17.27% | +9.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.82% | -7.86% | +4.04% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 10.94% | — |
Volatility
TFNS vs. BDCZ - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| TFNS | BDCZ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 8.37% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 17.17% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.04% | 20.42% | -5.38% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.04% | 17.80% | -2.76% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.04% | 21.73% | -6.69% |
TFNS vs. BDCZ - Expense Ratio Comparison
TFNS has a 0.44% expense ratio, which is lower than BDCZ's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
TFNS vs. BDCZ - Dividend Comparison
TFNS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.52%, less than BDCZ's 11.28% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BDCZ ETRACS MVIS Business Development Companies Index ETN | 11.28% | 10.65% | 9.26% | 9.13% | 9.39% | 7.49% | 10.01% | 8.40% | 9.66% | 8.74% | 7.98% |
TFNS T. Rowe Price Financials ETF | 0.52% | 0.49% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
TFNS and BDCZ have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, TFNS is cheaper at 0.44% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
TFNS is cheaper with a 0.44% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for BDCZ.
BDCZ has the higher dividend yield at 11.28%, compared with 0.52% for TFNS.
They also come from different issuers: T. Rowe Price and UBS. Their fees differ too: 0.44% for TFNS and 0.85% for BDCZ.
Find the right allocation for TFNS and BDCZ
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