BCDF vs CWS
Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF vs AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF
Which is better, BCDF or CWS?
Each has led over a different period.
CWS has a lower expense ratio. BCDF led over 1Y and 3Y, CWS over the full window.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BCDF | CWS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.65%Best |
| AUM | $23M | $119M |
| Dividend Yield | 2.37% | 0.32% |
| Holdings | 35 | 27 |
| YTD Return | +5.08%Best | -2.08% |
| 1Y Return | +2.09%Best | -0.90% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.97%Best | +9.32% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +7.43% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3%Best | 16.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -27.7% | -17.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 4.2 years | $13,100 | $14,747Best |
| Fund Family | Horizon Kinetics LLC | Advisor Shares |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Mid Cap Growth |
| Inception | Aug 1, 2022 | Sep 20, 2016 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 2, 2022 to Oct 14, 2026 (4.2 years).
BCDF vs CWS growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 4.2 years both funds cover.
BCDF vs CWS Performance
Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF (BCDF) is an ETF from Horizon Kinetics LLC and AdvisorShares Focused Equity ETF (CWS) is an ETF from Advisor Shares. Over the past year BCDF returned +2.09% while CWS returned -0.90%. Year to date, BCDF is up 5.08% versus a loss of 2.08% for CWS.
Over three years, BCDF compounded at +15.97% per year against +9.32% for CWS. Across the full 4-year window we track, CWS has the edge at +9.69% annualized vs +6.64%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CWS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.4% compared with 15.3% for BCDF. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -27.7% for BCDF and -17.0% for CWS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BCDF charges 0.85% per year while CWS charges 0.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $65 annually, a gap of $20 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BCDF currently yields 2.37% against 0.32% for CWS.
Holdings Overlap
At least 11.7% of CWS's money is in holdings BCDF also owns.
Stated as a floor: for BCDF, our book for it covers 91.1% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
CWS and BCDF share little of their money.
3 positions in common, counted across the 32 positions we hold weights for in BCDF and 26 in CWS, against full books of 35 and 27.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 32 and 26 positions we hold weights for.
BCDF holds 15 positions CWS does not, 43.7% of the fund.
Largest: CBOE 6.96%, CACI 5.43%, NDAQ 4.88%, WT 4.67%, LB 3.84%
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BCDF and CWS you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BCDF or CWS?
BCDF has an expense ratio of 0.85% while CWS charges 0.65%. CWS is the cheaper option, by $20 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BCDF or CWS?
Over the past year BCDF returned +2.09% vs -0.90% for CWS, so BCDF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), BCDF annualized +6.64% vs +9.69% for CWS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BCDF or CWS?
CWS has been the more volatile fund at 16.4% annualized versus 15.3% for BCDF. Worst drawdown: BCDF -27.7% vs CWS -17.0%.
Should I hold both BCDF and CWS?
BCDF and CWS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between BCDF and CWS?
At least 11.7% of CWS's money is in holdings BCDF also owns. Our book for BCDF is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 3 positions in common, counted across the 32 positions we hold weights for in BCDF and 26 in CWS.
Which pays a higher dividend, BCDF or CWS?
BCDF yields 2.37% while CWS yields 0.32%, so BCDF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is CWS better than BCDF?
CWS has a lower expense ratio. BCDF led over 1Y and 3Y, CWS over the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.