XBCI vs. IBLC
XBCI (NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF) and IBLC (iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF) are both Cryptocurrency funds. XBCI is actively managed, while IBLC is passively managed. Their 0.68 correlation means they have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently. XBCI charges 0.98%/yr vs 0.47%/yr for IBLC.
Performance
XBCI vs. IBLC - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
XBCI
- 1D
- -3.22%
- 1M
- 3.82%
- 6M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
IBLC
- 1D
- -2.87%
- 1M
- -4.33%
- 6M
- 0.61%
- YTD
- 5.99%
- 1Y
- 17.60%
- 3Y*
- 26.70%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 17.35%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $395.00K | $481.87K | $794.27K | |
| $3.48M | $3.42M | $5.46M |
XBCI vs. IBLC - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
XBCI NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF | -22.94% |
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF | 2.87% |
Correlation
The correlation between XBCI and IBLC is 0.68, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 3, 2026 | 0.68 |
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
XBCI vs. IBLC — Risk / Return Rank
XBCI
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
IBLC
XBCI vs. IBLC - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF (XBCI) 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.
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.
| XBCI | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.07 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 0.20 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 0.36 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XBCI vs. IBLC - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XBCI drawdown since its inception was -37.31%, smaller than the maximum IBLC drawdown of -62.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XBCI and IBLC.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XBCI | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.31% | -62.54% | +25.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -44.94% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -51.68% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -30.97% | -30.32% | -0.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -15.82% | -25.78% | +9.96% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 24.44% | — |
Volatility
XBCI vs. IBLC - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XBCI | IBLC | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 19.77% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 43.51% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 62.61% | 57.85% | +4.76% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 62.61% | 64.48% | -1.87% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 62.61% | 64.48% | -1.87% |
XBCI vs. IBLC - Expense Ratio Comparison
XBCI has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is higher than IBLC's 0.47% expense ratio.
Dividends
XBCI vs. IBLC - Dividend Comparison
XBCI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 26.04%, more than IBLC's 5.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IBLC iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF | 5.91% | 6.31% | 1.60% | 1.79% | 0.84% |
XBCI NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF | 26.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
XBCI and IBLC have a correlation of 0.68, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, IBLC is cheaper at 0.47% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
IBLC is cheaper with a 0.47% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for XBCI.
XBCI has the higher dividend yield at 26.04%, compared with 5.91% for IBLC.
They also come from different issuers: Neos and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for XBCI and 0.47% for IBLC.
Find the right allocation for XBCI and IBLC
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