UX vs. BSCQ
UX (Roundhill Uranium ETF) and BSCQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UX is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while BSCQ is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the NASDAQ BulletShares USD Corporate Bond 2026 Index. UX is actively managed, while BSCQ is passively managed. Over the past year, UX returned 17.18% vs 4.41% for BSCQ. At a correlation of -0.07, they often move in opposite directions. UX charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.10%/yr for BSCQ.
Performance
UX vs. BSCQ - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, UX achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than BSCQ's 1.55% return.
UX
- 1D
- -2.53%
- 1M
- -3.11%
- YTD
- -0.61%
- 6M
- 6.59%
- 1Y
- 17.18%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BSCQ
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.34%
- YTD
- 1.55%
- 6M
- 1.92%
- 1Y
- 4.41%
- 3Y*
- 5.06%
- 5Y*
- 1.47%
- 10Y*
- —
UX vs. BSCQ - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF | -0.61% | 15.76% |
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF | 1.55% | 4.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between UX and BSCQ 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 Jan 30, 2025 | -0.07 |
UX vs. BSCQ - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
UX
BSCQ
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
Industrials
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Energy
UX
BSCQ
Basic Materials
UX
-
BSCQ
Communication Services
UX
-
BSCQ
Consumer Cyclical
UX
-
BSCQ
Consumer Defensive
UX
-
BSCQ
Financial Services
UX
-
BSCQ
Healthcare
UX
-
BSCQ
Industrials
UX
-
BSCQ
Real Estate
UX
-
BSCQ
Technology
UX
-
BSCQ
Utilities
UX
-
BSCQ
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
UX vs. BSCQ — Risk / Return Rank
UX
BSCQ
UX vs. BSCQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) 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.
| UX | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -6.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -14.30 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.11 | 3.45 | -2.34 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 0.73 | 43.24 | -42.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.45 | 179.65 | -178.19 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| UX | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.50 | 7.06 | -6.56 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.45 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.31 | 0.60 | -0.30 |
Drawdowns
UX vs. BSCQ - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum UX drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, which is greater than BSCQ's maximum drawdown of -16.50%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UX and BSCQ.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| UX | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.72% | -16.50% | -7.22% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -23.72% | -0.10% | -23.62% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -1.13% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -13.02% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -19.59% | 0.00% | -19.59% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -10.13% | -2.85% | -7.28% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 11.87% | 0.02% | +11.85% |
Volatility
UX vs. BSCQ - Volatility Comparison
Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) has a higher volatility of 8.07% compared to Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCQ) at 0.17%. This indicates that UX'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
| UX | BSCQ | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 8.07% | 0.17% | +7.90% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 24.59% | 0.43% | +24.16% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 34.45% | 0.63% | +33.82% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 36.20% | 3.30% | +32.90% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 36.20% | 4.77% | +31.43% |
UX vs. BSCQ - Expense Ratio Comparison
UX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than BSCQ's 0.10% expense ratio.
Dividends
UX vs. BSCQ - Dividend Comparison
UX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, less than BSCQ's 4.12% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BSCQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Corporate Bond ETF | 4.12% | 4.14% | 4.05% | 3.53% | 2.54% | 1.91% | 2.42% | 2.96% | 3.32% | 2.92% | 0.51% |
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF | 1.49% | 1.48% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
UX and BSCQ 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.
UX has higher volatility (8.07%) compared to BSCQ (0.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UX dropped -23.72% vs BSCQ's -16.50%.
On 1-year performance, UX leads with 17.18% vs 4.41% for BSCQ. On fees, BSCQ is cheaper at 0.10% per year. On volatility, BSCQ has been the lower-risk option at 0.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, UX has performed better with a 17.18% return vs 4.41%. 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 UX.
BSCQ has the higher dividend yield at 4.12%, compared with 1.49% for UX.
UX is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while BSCQ is Corporate Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for UX and 0.10% for BSCQ.
BSCQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (7.06 vs 0.50), 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 UX 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